Abortion Discussion, Part the Fourth

Kidchameleon wrote: »

If I have failed to answer any question I'd be happy to if you let me know what I may have missed. Im pretty sure I have answered all questions put to me at this stage though

You ignored my entire post 638, nearly all of post 650, and now the near majority of post 866. Basically.

Kidchameleon wrote: »

I was asking specifically about abortion. Ill ask you again, if a rape victim decided to abort at 24 weeks would you deny their request?

I agree that it is a rare scenario but it is very possible.

You seem to imagine that the 25% or whatever it is of 24-week babies who survive were simply born sufficiently mature to live, much like a full term baby only smaller. That's not the case. A baby that is born at 24 weeks and just put in a cot or given to its mother will die. It can't feed, can't control its body temperature, often can't breathe by itself etc etc. If the mother hasn't been given steroid injections in the days before birth its lungs won't be mature enough even with oxygen.

The babies who do survive only do so thanks to a massive amount of high tech medicine and many of the procedures can be very painful. So painful that in some cases of very premature birth of very much wanted babies, parents are nevertheless advised not to insist on resuscitation in the first place, because the results are so unsure and it is felt to be putting the baby basically through torture only to end up with it probably either dying anyway or being severely disabled for its whole life.

This was the case even with the 8th amendment by the way, because once the baby is born, the legal situation changed and it had no further "right to life". Just like the rest of us actually.

Igotadose wrote: »

And the resulting children typically have lots of life-long limitations due to such an early birth.

I often wonder what happened that poor baby that was born to that poor asylum seeker Ms Y. I read a year or so afterwards that someone who was a social worker involved with his case had said that he was blind and possibly deaf as a result of his traumatically early birth but I don't think I've seen anything since.

The whole thing was just so awful. That they preferred to traumatise her by refusing a termination at 8 or 10 weeks when she made her feelings clear, and ended up bringing an unwanted and severely disabled baby into the world to be brought up in the Irish "care" system, further traumatising her and probably the baby.

volchitsa wrote: »

The whole thing was just so awful. That they preferred to traumatise her by refusing a termination at 8 or 10 weeks when she made her feelings clear, and ended up bringing an unwanted and severely disabled baby into the world to be brought up in the Irish "care" system, further traumatising her and probably the baby.

It's NEVER about the fetus, though, once born. It's about forcing the birth.

AOC had a good tweet about the Alabama law (which was signed by the Governor there yesterday, so it's in effect for now):
https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1128890390982123522?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

This is probably "old hat" to some/most here as something that's been done over here in the aged past. Checking up on the word abortion currently used in this debate, I came up with some US [state] laws in abortion. It seems one state [Pennysylvania] recognize a fertilized human egg as an unborn child but others don't [Alaska -the egg has to be in the womb] while others see the presence of a foetal heartbeat as a sign the feotus is an unborn child, Mississippi heartbeat law defines an unborn individual as “an individual organism of the species homo sapiens from fertilization until live birth". How can a fertilized human egg which has just come into existence have a heartbeat at 5 weeks and 23 hours+ short of 6 weeks?

Arizona law has something similarly worded but uses the term human embryo alongside “a living organism of the species homo sapiens through the first fifty-six days of its development.

The state laws there are a hodgepodge mess and really not much use outside the individual state they are enacted in as a quotable definition of what exists in law to be aborted. I should point out that I have not gone into the present situation to see if the laws I mentioned are still in legal force in the states that enacted them or if they've been overturned in law on appeal/reference on their validity under the US constitution. Ditto on the ACOG position below.

Another quote to give some explanation as to what a fertilized human egg is: According to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, “[c]onception is a lay term that has no scientific validity and is not generally used in the medical literature because of its variable definition and connotation.” Researchers instead use the word “fertilization” to refer to “the union of sperm and ovum.” Such distinctions makes a difference when determining the legal status of preborn human reproductive cells.

Edit: 07/05/2019. Gov. Brian Kemp of Georgia signed one of the most restrictive abortion laws in the nation. The law effectively bans abortions after six weeks of pregnancy, the time when a fetal heartbeat is usually detected. Kentucky state house voted in a similar law in March earlier this year, using the 6 week heartbeat detection position.

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Nowhere in my post did I rule out the possibility of delivery. If the victim wanted to deliver then that would be a great solution imho.

I was asking specifically about abortion. Ill ask you again, if a rape victim decided to abort at 24 weeks would you deny their request?

I agree that it is a rare scenario but it is very possible.

And I said delivery of a viable fetus is aborting the pregnancy.

You seem to be missing the point that the desired end result is that the woman in question is no longer pregnant. That does not necessarily mean terminating the fetus. It absolutely means terminating the pregnancy.

Apart from that it isn't my place to deny or approve. That is between the woman and her medical team. I do not know what this 'trauma' is that delayed her decision. Is it physical or mental or both? Is she in danger of committing suicide? Is continuing the pregnancy a danger to her health or life?

There are nuances in real life that render your 'but if a rape victim is so traumatised that she doesn't want an abortion until 5 1/2 months into the pregnancy' a fairly pointless 'what if...' example of an (imho unlikely) extreme case.

Charles Ingles wrote: »

You are mixing up the old testament and the new testament.
And Our lady did give birth to out saviour Jesus Christ.
You may not believe but have a bit of respect for people of faith

Ah the auld effectiveness of throwing away the OT when it contradicts the new :rolleyes:

She allegedly gave birth, there is no evidence that she did.

I don't have to respect anyones faith, that's the joys of free will