Healthy baby aborted at 15 weeks

Hardcharger

....... wrote: »

Its not very compassionate to expect a woman to go through with a doomed pregnancy simply because you personally do not agree with abortion.

Its simply inflicting needless suffering. On the woman, her family, the unborn child who will have developed a nervous system and will experience pain upon both birth and death.

Why would you WANT people to go through that suffering?

Because killing an innocent child is murder that's why.

A toddler that is terminally ill or a terminally ill or disabled adult or indeed anybody with pain or suffering from depression or even bad luck in life could be killed on compassionate reasons based on your logic.

In the last century bureaucrats in Russia decided that people who were class enemies should be rooted out and exterminated. In Germany the mentally ill the disabled the sick gays and non Aryans were murdered by gas. This is was done by ordinary people blinded by an ideology that convinced them this was good.

You cloak your desire to kill in "compassion"

The disposal of human beings like they are waste.

Utterly sick and evil

gctest50

Hardcharger wrote: »

..........

The disposal of human beings like they are waste.

.........

Some human beings should dispose of themselves though, for example : incels

They go on like :

An incel last week/yesterday/everyday : all the women go for 10% of the men with bmws n gym bodies
n waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah women owe the incels

They'll do anything for attention and to get at women ( cos they see them as one big unit that's out to get them not out to get them

Hardcharger

gctest50 wrote: »

Some human beings should dispose of themselves though, for example : incels

They go on like :

They'll do anything for attention and to get at women ( cos they see them as one big unit that's out to get them not out to get them

A foetus is alive innocent and human.
It is an innocent human life.
Abortion takes an innocent human life.
The taking of an innocent human life is murder.
Ergo abortion is murder

gctest50

Welcome to boards new poster

gctest50

Hardcharger wrote: »

,..........

The taking of an innocent human life is murder.

....

Murder is the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.

uptherebels

mvl wrote: »

but lets step back a bit ...

- if the maternity medical services in Ireland are provided by a GP and/or a hospital obstetrician, these roles have responsibility for the mother/fetus well being (they would implicitly examine the woman earlier in the pregnancy) - why shouldn't they be one of the parties required when authorizing a termination ?

imo, whoever executes additional tests required in a pregnancy (including to prove FFA) can be seen as a third party; and as any third party, they should rather provide input/recommendation to such decision, instead of being authorized to approve the actual termination.

It has to be two medical practitioners. For FFA the termination has to carried out by an obstetrician who has to be one of the 2 medical practitioners that signed off.
I believe that this wording is so that
It doesn't have to be the woman's obstetrician because hospitals can't guarantee the same staff and to allow for the possibility of a CO.
The issue here as far as I can see with the info available is the "examination". Not who signed off.
The point I believe that will be argued is that if they didn't meet the woman they couldn't have examined her, while ignoring that an examination doesn't necessarily mean a physical one.

uptherebels

Hardcharger wrote: »

I voted NO last year because I knew this would happen.

The parents murdered their own child. I have no sympathy for them whatsoever.

The doctors who killed the baby directly and the nurses who assisted and anyone else who works in the hospital involved are murderers.

Anyone who voted Yes last year and whooped and cheered like they won an All Ireland in those stupid black repeal jerseys is a murderer.

Simple as that.

You voted no because you foresaw a medical misdiagnosis!

3 tests were done. The first 2 indicated FFA so parents decided on an abortion. The 3rd test results came back after the abortion giving a different result to the first 2. If the 3rd result came back before the abortion, would they still have aborted or taken the risk that 2 out of 3 were wrong?

A very sad case, compounded by guilt.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/td-tells-dail-that-family-at-centre-of-nmh-termination-case-believe-illegal-abortion-was-carried-out-930433.html

gctest50

[Deleted User] wrote: »

...........

would they still have aborted or taken the risk that 2 out of 3 were wrong?

............

The 3rd is more accurate

“When the CVS test is taken, two different samples are sent. One for a rapid result which comes back within 48 hours and the other which can take up to two weeks and it is 100 per cent,” Prof Malone said.

The rapid test can give a false positive. “That’s why it is necessary to look at the total picture. If there is no ultrasound abnormality most laboratories recommend to wait for the full two weeks,” he explained.

“But some patients are not prepared to wait the two weeks and want to continue to termination. Generally we recommend that they get the total picture,” he added.

journal.ie

Sunny Disposition

Jaster Rogue wrote: »

Doesn't change the fact the 8th would have prevented this healthy baby's killing. The truth hurts sometimes.

Unfortunately Jaster is correct, we had laws that would have saved this child. I voted to allow abortion despite some reservations, but this certainly rocks my belief I did the right thing.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Hardcharger wrote: »

I voted NO last year because I knew this would happen.

The parents murdered their own child. I have no sympathy for them whatsoever.

The doctors who killed the baby directly and the nurses who assisted and anyone else who works in the hospital involved are murderers.

Anyone who voted Yes last year and whooped and cheered like they won an All Ireland in those stupid black repeal jerseys is a murderer.

Simple as that.

Are the people who voted yes but didn’t wear campaign jumpers or whoop not murderers? What are the parameters?

Atoms for Peace

Guess I'm an evil child murderer so!

Wanderer78

Atoms for Peace wrote:

Guess I'm an evil child murderer so!

Me to, maybe prison won't be too bad, hope they have enough space for us all

Sunny Disposition

Hardcharger wrote: »

I voted NO last year because I knew this would happen.

The parents murdered their own child. I have no sympathy for them whatsoever.

The doctors who killed the baby directly and the nurses who assisted and anyone else who works in the hospital involved are murderers.

Anyone who voted Yes last year and whooped and cheered like they won an All Ireland in those stupid black repeal jerseys is a murderer.

Simple as that.

This is the problem with debate on abortion, wild language and claims and a failure to see the point of view of anyone else. You’re as much of a flute as those doing the whooping in the black repeal jumpers.

Atoms for Peace

The parents decided they didn't want to take the chance of having a baby with a life limiting condition, which is a right I fully support. There doesn't seem to be any suggestions of medical negligence, to me the story is being used to push a pro life agenda.

FutureGuy

Hardcharger wrote: »

A foetus is alive innocent and human.
It is an innocent human life.
Abortion takes an innocent human life.
The taking of an innocent human life is murder.
Ergo abortion is murder

It's like you wrote down all the No taglines from last year and made a post from them.

uck51js9zml2yt

gctest50 wrote: »

Murder is the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.

Exactly.
One minutes pro abortionists are on about the calling of a 15 week old foetus as waste and the next they are saying it's ok to kill it and call it waste.(if it's disabled)

By their logic, this wasn't a baby, yet here are the parents saying it was and threating all sorts when it's called what the so called experts told us it was.

Hardcharger

Atoms for Peace wrote: »

Guess I'm an evil child murderer so!

If you support abortion - the deliberate murder of innocent babies - and you voted to legalize it and it is happening then yes you are.

You seem to be overjoyed. Absolutely evil and sick.

Hardcharger

FutureGuy wrote: »

It's like you wrote down all the No taglines from last year and made a post from them.

If you can't refute my logic that's not my problem. That's yours. You support murdering innocent babies. It's evil and wrong and you know it but you don't care..

nozzferrahhtoo

Hardcharger wrote: »

I voted NO last year because I knew this would happen.

Odd use of "because" there as for me and many people I know we voted yes KNOWING that a case like this would likely happen.

So I am not sure the use of "because" is quite as honest as you might be pretending, especially when your further rhetoric is based on....

Hardcharger wrote: »

The parents murdered their own child. I have no sympathy for them whatsoever.

.... a complete misuse of terms in order to manufacture emotional rhetoric. You would do well to find out what the word "Murder" means and realise it does not actually apply here.

Hardcharger wrote: »

Simple as that.

I think the word is simplistic, not simple. What you are espousing here is false, emotive, simplistic nonsense. Not at all "simple".

Hardcharger wrote: »

Because killing an innocent child is murder that's why.

That is not the definition of "murder". The definition of murder is to "kill unlawfully". Abortion is legal. Therefore by definition it is not murder. Guess what? Water is wet, and married Bachelors do not exist either. Isn't language wonderful?

Hardcharger wrote: »

A toddler that is terminally ill or a terminally ill or disabled adult or indeed anybody with pain or suffering from depression or even bad luck in life could be killed on compassionate reasons based on your logic.

A toddler is a sentient human agent. So MY logic, rather than yours, would not allow for their termination on a whim. A fetus as 12 weeks however has all the sentience of a rock or a table leg. As such, aside from your emotive misuse of the word murder, I am not seeing a single argument from you as to why we might afford it moral or ethical concern.

As the rest of your post is merely a "godwin" I shall not reply to it unless you require it?

Hardcharger wrote: »

You cloak your desire to kill in "compassion"

You cloak your desire to call people killers in compassion more like. As ALL the people I know of who are pro-choice.... myself included..... actively strive to construct a society where no abortions actually ever happen. Through contraception, education, and social welfare supports we strive to make sure abortion is a choice no woman has to make.

You might want to pretend we love the killing. The fact is however that when we promote a choice for abortion we do so DESPITE us not wanting people to actually have one.

Hardcharger wrote: »

If you can't refute my logic that's not my problem. That's yours.

Then I guess the fact that I CAN do so, is yours

gctest50

gctest50 wrote: »

The 3rd is more accurate

Then why bother with the first two?

Padraig Mor

Deleted User wrote: »

3 tests were done. The first 2 indicated FFA so parents decided on an abortion. The 3rd test results came back after the abortion giving a different result to the first 2. If the 3rd result came back before the abortion, would they still have aborted or taken the risk that 2 out of 3 were wrong?

I'm not sure if that's entirely accurate. My recollection of previous articles is that the parents pushed to wait for the results of the third test but their concerns were poo pooed by the hospital and they were practically railroaded into an abortion.

When the results of the third test came back the hospital didn't even have the guts to tell the parents the child was healthy - they were simply given the results in an envelope and pushed out the door (presumably in the hope that they wouldn't cop on). It was only when the parents brought the results to an independent doctor did the truth emerge.

The hospital have serious questions to answer in all of this.

Hardcharger

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Odd use of "because" there as for me and many people I know we voted yes KNOWING that a case like this would likely happen.

So I am not sure the use of "because" is quite as honest as you might be pretending, especially when your further rhetoric is based on....



.... a complete misuse of terms in order to manufacture emotional rhetoric. You would do well to find out what the word "Murder" means and realise it does not actually apply here.



I think the word is simplistic, not simple. What you are espousing here is false, emotive, simplistic nonsense. Not at all "simple".



That is not the definition of "murder". The definition of murder is to "kill unlawfully". Abortion is legal. Therefore by definition it is not murder. Guess what? Water is wet, and married Bachelors do not exist either. Isn't language wonderful?



A toddler is a sentient human agent. So MY logic, rather than yours, would not allow for their termination on a whim. A fetus as 12 weeks however has all the sentience of a rock or a table leg. As such, aside from your emotive misuse of the word murder, I am not seeing a single argument from you as to why we might afford it moral or ethical concern.

As the rest of your post is merely a "godwin" I shall not reply to it unless you require it?



You cloak your desire to call people killers in compassion more like. As ALL the people I know of who are pro-choice.... myself included..... actively strive to construct a society where no abortions actually ever happen. Through contraception, education, and social welfare supports we strive to make sure abortion is a choice no woman has to make.

You might want to pretend we love the killing. The fact is however that when we promote a choice for abortion we do so DESPITE us not wanting people to actually have one.



Then I guess the fact that I CAN do so, is yours

The parents found out their child could have a fatal abnormality. Once that happened the child became merely a foetus and they decided to kill it.

Noe that they know there was nothing wrong with the baby they are suddenly boo hooing too late.

What else is a foetus except a human being?

You know I sm right and your conscience is eating at you.

People like you voted Hitler into power and murdered the Jews - ordinary people who masked their nihilistic hatred behind ideology.

You cannot escape youf guilt. You are a child killer. You and people like you who voted yes killed that child. You might as well have fed the baby alive to a hungry dog

You have crossed the line into depravity and evil

The way back?

Campaign to restore the right to life and oppose abortion

Plumbthedepths

Adonis Broad Maid wrote:

Exactly. One minutes pro abortionists are on about the calling of a 15 week old foetus as waste and the next they are saying it's ok to kill it and call it waste.(if it's disabled)

Making up stuff is very poor debate tbh.

Plumbthedepths

Hardcharger wrote:

People like you voted Hitler into power and murdered the Jews - ordinary people who masked their nihilistic hatred behind ideology.

Godwin , the got to of someone unable to debate honestly.

Padraig Mor

Padraig Mor wrote: »

I'm not sure if that's entirely accurate. My recollection of previous articles is that the parents pushed to wait for the results of the third test but their concerns were poo pooed by the hospital and they were practically railroaded into an abortion.

When the results of the third test came back the hospital didn't even have the guts to tell the parents the child was healthy - they were simply given the results in an envelope and pushed out the door (presumably in the hope that they wouldn't cop on). It was only when the parents brought the results to an independent doctor did the truth emerge.

The hospital have serious questions to answer in all of this.

They regret aborting what they now know was a healthy baby. If they knew the results of the 3rd test beforehand, would they have continued with the pregnancy? After all, 2 out of 3 tests could be considered conclusive.

I’m just playing Devils Advocate here. I firmly believe in the right of a woman to be able to access safe abortion.

nozzferrahhtoo

Hardcharger wrote: »

The parents found out their child could have a fatal abnormality. Once that happened the child became merely a foetus and they decided to kill it.

I do not think it BECAME merely a fetus at that point. It was always merely a fetus. And the defect they were led to believe it possessed meant that it still being merely a fetus meant they had options. Unless you have direct information from the people in question I think the idea it was not a fetus one moment, and it was the next, is one you are inventing on their behalf for your own agenda.

Hardcharger wrote: »

What else is a foetus except a human being?

The problem we have is that the word "human" has meanings in many areas of discourse. It has one meaning in biology. It has another meaning in philosophy. I do not think ANYONE.... least of all me..... is suggesting that it was not human biologically.

However abortion is a moral and ethical issue. Not a biology issue. So it is the meaning of the word "Human" in moral philosophy we need to be concerned with here. Not biology. And there is NOTHING about a 12 week old fetus I can find..... nor have you moved to show any..... that grounds moral and ethical concern at that level.

Your ENTIRE rhetoric in fact, and that of pretty much every anti choice user of this forum since the referendum was announced........ appears to be based on conflating the diverse meanings of "Human" into one single meaning.

Hardcharger wrote: »

You know I sm right and your conscience is eating at you.

No reason why it would be or should be, so you are straw manning me here only. I have ZERO moral or ethical concern for non-sentient entities. My conscience for a 12 week old fetus is at EXACTLY the same level as my conscience for a rock or a table leg.

Hardcharger wrote: »

People like you voted Hitler into power and murdered the Jews

More strawman and Godwin here. My ENTIRE world view is based on the well being of sentient agents. Therefore nothing in my world view can even remotely be mangled into the contrived murder of any individual or group.

So basically my logic here is so insurmountable for you, that you have to erect a strawman that is not even remotely similar to me to burn down instead. Bully for you I guess but at least you are not alone. It is pretty much what every other anti choice poster on the forum had to do with me too.

Padraig Mor

Deleted User wrote: »

They regret aborting what they now know was a healthy baby. If they knew the results of the 3rd test beforehand, would they have continued with the pregnancy? After all, 2 out of 3 tests could be considered conclusive.

I’m just playing Devils Advocate here. I firmly believe in the right of a woman to be able to access safe abortion.

My understanding is that the third test was the 'definitive' one - but the hospital just didn't care.

ohnonotgmail

Hardcharger wrote: »

If you can't refute my logic that's not my problem. That's yours. You support murdering innocent babies. It's evil and wrong and you know it but you don't care..

why dont you try post some and we'll give it a go refuting it. Beware of false premises.

Padraig Mor

Padraig Mor wrote: »

My understanding is that the third test was the 'definitive' one - but the hospital just didn't care.

So, what were the other 2 tests?