How do Pro Life campaigners want women who have abortions punished?

Originally Posted by PucaMama
a disturbing read on the realities of late term abortion. whatever about the abortions up to 12 weeks, what is allowed to happen in europe to babies born alive after abortion is horrific.

That's the OneOfUs shower :

http://www.oneofus.eu/our-mission/

http://i.imgur.com/GdocMTs.jpg

gctest50 wrote: »

That's the OneOfUs shower :

Are they wrong?

volchitsa wrote: »

You made the claim though. Too bad you can't make it stand up.

I disagree entirely with your comparisons, in fact I find them facile and silly. All you've done since is dig in.

If you were right, that would imply that pretty much any mother in Ireland who is not actively anti choice probably regrets having at least one or more of her children, since she couldn't terminate any pregnancy. And that women in the Uk, who could terminate but chose not to, obviously love their children more than Irish mothers.

You're talking a load of nonsense there, and being highly disingenuous.

PucaMama wrote: »

it doesnt matter who it is, its fact. despicable inhuman behaviour.

It actually does matter when we know the pro life movement has not only fabricated/doctored video evidence in the US, their alleged counsellors here have knowingly lied about the effects of abortion to women looking for help. And that nobody in the pro life side had the honesty to condemn those lies. Breda OBrien wrote a whole article about it that said, well so what the other side lies too!
There's every reason to disbelieve anything they say.

volchitsa wrote: »

It actually does matter when we know the pro life movement has not only fabricated/doctored video evidence in the US, their alleged counsellors here have knowingly lied about the effects of abortion to women looking for help.
There's every reason to disbelieve anything they say.

i take it you have not read the report. its based on statistics released by governments of countries in europe. not only on peoples stories.

PucaMama wrote: »

i take it you have not read the report. its based on statistics released by governments of countries in europe. not only on peoples stories.

What it's supposedly based on is not actually as important as knowing how it's presented, i.e. whether the writers are cherry picking because they want to push their own belief and are ready to misrepresent those statistics to that end.

As I said.

PucaMama wrote: »

why would they need to misrepresent it when it actually happens? doctors leaving babies born by abortion at 20+ weeks to die by themselves without any support. nothing you can say can take away from that. it happens. and its disgusting.

amazing how people on here can take personal stories from women who have had abortions and are pro choice and not question them yet nothing that comes from pro life people can be taken at face value.

The ones I've seen in the link were terminations for medical reasons, i.e. babies that were going to die after birth. So what do you suggest should have been done?

Do you realize that highly premature babies born at 20+ weeks in Ireland are sometimes left to die because they are likely to be so disabled that their lives would be a misery. It's the same problem.
There's no point in using painful techniques to save a baby's life if that life is going to be painful and possibly short.

PucaMama wrote: »

why would they need to misrepresent it when it actually happens? doctors leaving babies born by abortion at 20+ weeks to die by themselves without any support. nothing you can say can take away from that. it happens. and its disgusting. ......

Because infanticide is illegal, if a doctor tries to help anyway at all and fails , they may be prosecuted for it
(even though it is going to die anyway from the drugs administered or other reasons )

It's one reason ( in the UK anyway) they break up the fetus before removing it - just in case they get done for infanticide

If the child is already going to die give it pain reflief. Make it comfortable. Don't leave it to die alone on a table. Basic palliative care. Basic human dignity. Is that too much to ask for?

sup_dude wrote: »

PucaMama wrote: »

amazing how people on here can take personal stories from women who have had abortions and are pro choice and not question them yet nothing that comes from pro life people can be taken at face value.

One side has a clear agenda and are a little more extreme, than the other. Extreme's tend to warp information in order for it to agree with their agenda, and have a track record of doing so. I'm talking in general, by the way, to answer why one gets questioned more often than the other.

One side will always see the other as more extreme. It's how they justify their own opinion.

But how can it be extreme to say what happens to children born alive from late abortions.

volchitsa wrote: »

Just noticed you edited your original reply to someone else entirely nearly 10 minutes later and after other posts had been made in between, to make it look as though you had replied to me.

Very poor form IMO.

Nonsense and disingenuous, again. I didn't edit anything, just added on. Very poor form IMO.

Not to mention that you haven't replied to my post at all, just called it disingenuous. How exactly do you make that out?

Very easily. Something about UK mothers loving their babies more because they had the option of abortion but didn't take it up. I never said or implied anything close to that. I'm on the phone here and it's a little difficult to keep up. I dont think your misrepresentation of me deserves that effort. If I thought you genuinely didn't understand my point, I'd elaborate, as I did before.

PucaMama wrote: »

One side will always see the other as more extreme. It's how they justify their own opinion.

But how can it be extreme to say what happens to children born alive from late abortions.

Except, one side is obdurate and the other isn't. One side see only black and white, the other see the various shades of grey in between. One side is saying absolutely no abortion for any reason, the other side are saying that there can be a reason and women can choose to abort or choose not to abort. One side are extreme in their views, the other are fairly middle ground. The opposite extreme to no foetus should be aborted (regardless of circumstances) would be to believe all foetus should be aborted (regardless of circumstances)...

I also did say in a general sense. Very few late term abortions are carried out, and I think you would find that most pro-choice would agree to a time limit, unless health reasons become a factor.

PucaMama wrote: »

If the child is already going to die give it pain reflief. Make it comfortable. Don't leave it to die alone on a table. Basic palliative care. Basic human dignity. Is that too much to ask for?

They're supposed to do that, but it shouldn't happen :

Fetal demise may be induced by intra-amniotic or intrathoracic injection of digoxin (up to 1 mg) and by umbilical venous or intracardiac injection of 1% lignocaine (up to 30 ml).
Neither procedure, however,consistently induces fetal demise.

Intracardiac potassium chloride (KCl) is the recommended method to ensure fetal asystole.
After aspiration of fetal blood to confirm correct placement of the needle, 2–3 ml strong (15%) KCl is injected into a cardiac ventricle. A repeat injection may be required if asystole has not occurred after 30–60 seconds. Asystole should be documented for at least 2 minutes and a scan repeated after 30–60 minutes to ensure fetal demise. In a series of 239 cases of feticide using this technique, between 20+5 and 37+5 weeks of gestation, there were no failures (live births)


The clinicians noted that lethal fetal administration of potassium chloride in advanced pregnancy termination limits the involvement of medical staff in ethically sensitive issues. The findings show that this methodology is safe for the woman and effective at preventing live births.

.

sup_dude wrote: »

Except, one side is obdurate and the other isn't. One side see only black and white, the other see the various shades of grey in between. One side is saying absolutely no abortion for any reason, the other side are saying that there can be a reason and women can choose to abort or choose not to abort. One side are extreme in their views, the other are fairly middle ground.

One side are extreme in their views, saying it's a woman's choice no matter what. The other side is saying that there can be a reason for abortion, eg. where the woman's life is at risk. One side are extreme in their views, the other are fairly middle ground.

The opposite extreme to no foetus should be aborted (regardless of circumstances) would be to believe all foetus should be aborted (regardless of circumstances)...

The debate is pro-life vs pro abortion availability, not vs pro enforced abortion.

Will respond to the other replies in a bit but just quickly on these two comments:

sup_dude wrote: »

If I were to walk into the doctor tomorrow and ask for this, I would be refused. It is very very difficult to get permission to have this done.

I know, I've had girlfriends that wanted the procedure and were told they were too young but they shouldn't have been. In the context of abortion all we hear is how the laws are stopping women doing what they want with their body, well that is bs, but the restrictions regarding tubal ligation very much are stopping women doing what they want with their bodies but yet the outcry doesn't seem anyway near as loud. It should be.

gctest50 wrote: »

couldn't be the same one surely ?

This made me laugh, as did the backslaps it received. Of course they are pro life but how exactly does that negate the relevancy of those women's experiences? Funny how the Pro Choice movement expect things from the Pro-Life Campaign that they wouldn't expect of themselves.

The Pro-Choice lobby’s exploitation of the Savita Halappanavar tragedy for example was sickening. They turned her into a symbolic victim. How many protests / vigils did they organize? But yet when part of the Pro Life Campaign is highlighting women's regret, there's some kind of 'gotcha moment'?? Ha.

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

but the restrictions regarding tubal ligation very much are stopping women doing what they want with their bodies but yet the outcry doesn't seem anyway near as loud. It should be.

Oh there's been plenty of outcry about it, indeed one of the objections to the proposed amalgam of various Dublin maternities recently was related to the fact that some of them won't perform TLs for religious reasons.

However it doesn't attract the same media attention because refusal tends to be on an individual basis and there is no actual law banning it, so less easy for the media to write an unrstandable explanaiton without risking defamation suits etc, I suppose. It would require some actual investigative journalism, something that seems to be beyond most Irish media outlets.

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

I know, I've had girlfriends that wanted the procedure and were told they were too young but they shouldn't have been. In the context of abortion all we hear is how the laws are stopping women doing what they want with their body, well that is bs

Except you're wrong, it certainly is stopping them, it's just that you think that's ok. Even though that is a different point entirely.

The Pro-Choice lobby’s exploitation of the Savita Halappanavar tragedy for example was sickening. They turned her into a symbolic victim. How many protests / vigils did they organize?

So the fact that her widower went to a ProChoice group in despair because he was getting nowhere with any explanation from the hospital has passed you by?

Or perhaps that just doesn't matter when you need to use her death to push your own agenda?

Hypocrisy much?

But yet when part of the Pro Life Campaign is highlighting women's regret, there's some kind of 'gotcha moment'?? Ha.

Again all very selective stuff there from you. People regret decisions they've made all the time. Hardly a reason to ban marriage or a career choice, or anything else. Funny that pro life goes on about women having to assume the alleged responsibility that flows merely from having sex, but if a woman regrets her abortion, it implies that all women must be prevented from ever having that choice themselves. What's happened to the woman's individual responsibility for her choices? Having sex even with contraception means she has to stay pregnant, but having an abortion makes her a victim? :rolleyes: