Maryland Abortion Doctors Charged With Murder


Ariadne
+1
#151
Quote: Originally Posted by KreskinView Post

The issue my health is none of your business. If you think it is then all women should be quarantined and monitored for one month after sex to ensure they don't endanger a potential baby, then we can enforce a strict diet for the remaining term.

There's a big difference between expecting women to take responsibility for their pregnancy and quarantining women that have sex.

I'm curious ... under what circumstances is it justifiable for a woman to delay making a decision regarding the termination of a pregnancy for 33 weeks? There are tests available that confirm a pregnancy 3 -5 days after conception. Years ago, it took a month to confirm a pregnancy. The faster tests were obviously developed to provide women with more time to make the important decision ... so why should women still have the option of waiting until after the child is viable, at 33 weeks, to terminate the development ... simply because it is a viable unborn child rather than a viable born child? Women can run international corporations, but when it comes to making a decision about whether they want to raise a child they become braindead? How does that work?

Quote: Originally Posted by bluebyrd35View Post

It is violent. we have had to put a rope around protruding hooves of a calf more than once and lever it out of the cow when we could not get a vet in time to save them both. Even during normal birthing cows bellow in pain, as do many other species. As for the bonbon remark, well we have progressed somewhat from that belief.
How well educated do you suppose a young, unmarried girl is about amniocentesis? I would say not very well, if she was either too poor or too undeducated to use birthcontrol in the first place. And why do you think even an incompetent abortion dr. simply yanks fetuses out of a woman's body?? How about a bit of reality here. This would kill the woman as well as the fetus.
This sort of simplistic ranting is not conducive to reasonable discussion, anymore a religiously based one is.
"A fetus is viable when it reaches an "anatomical threshold" when critical organs, such as the lungs and kidneys, can sustain independent life. Until the air sacs are mature enough to permit gases to pass into and out of the bloodstream, which is extremely unlikely until at least 23 weeks gestation (from last menstrual period), a fetus cannot be sustained even with a respirator, which can force air into the lungs but cannot pass gas from the lungs into the bloodstream."
There are very few late term abortions done even in Canada where we do not have a law...

Quote has been trimmed, See full post: View Post
Fortunately, women are not cows and their offspring aren't calves born in a barn.

Women today deliver their children in many different environments. One of the calmest, easiest environments for delivery is in water. There is no violence in a water birth. Calm mothers have calm births ... hysterical mothers have hysterical births, but not all births are violent by any stretch of the imagination.

It is not only young, unmarried women that have late term abortions. Furthermore, the incidence of fetal abnormalities identified through amniocentesis is relatively low for young, healthy women.

Women have a responsibility in reproduction. If they get pregnant, they are responsible for making the decisions associated with pregnancy in a timely manner. Since all testing regarding abnormalities is available at about 18 weeks gestation, there is no excuse for waiting until 33 weeks ... and there is certainly no excuse for doctors to accommodate women that are so confused about their choice that they allow them to delay making critical decisions until well after the fetus is viable.
 
JLM
+1
#152
[QUOTE=bluebyrd35;1530765]
Quote: Originally Posted by JLMView Post

It doesn't matter what you do Petros, you are NEVER going to convince people who priortise their own selfish interests! [/QUOTE

Jesus Murphy, the selfish critters are those who insist their will takes priority over the will of others. How many of these selfish critters have actually adopted any of those unwanted in our institutions. Those with the biggest mouths, usually have the least compassion.

Bluebyrd- When you decide to have an abortion, what does the fetus get to decide? and who is acting on his/her behalf?
 
Kreskin
+1
#153
Quote: Originally Posted by AriadneView Post

There's a big difference between expecting women to take responsibility for their pregnancy and quarantining women that have sex.
I'm curious ... under what circumstances is it justifiable for a woman to delay making a decision regarding the termination of a pregnancy for 33 weeks? There are tests available that confirm a pregnancy 3 -5 days after conception. Years ago, it took a month to confirm a pregnancy. The faster tests were obviously developed to provide women with more time to make the important decision ... so why should women still have the option of waiting until after the child is viable, at 33 weeks, to terminate the development ... simply because it is a viable unborn child rather than a viable born child? Women can run international corporations, but when it comes to making a decision about whether they want to raise a child they become braindead? How does that work?
Fortunately, women are not cows and their offspring aren't calves born in a barn.
Women today deliver their children in many different environments. One of the calmest, easiest environments for delivery is in water. There is no violence in a water birth. Calm mothers have calm births ... hysterical mothers have hysterical births, but not all births are violent by any stretch of the imagination.

Quote has been trimmed, See full post: View Post
How about she's carrying a baby with Turner's Syndrome and it has no eyes, then her husband and parents died in an auto-accident, plus she has been diagnosed with terminal cancer and she's being evicted and will be living on the street. I'm sure that's not good enough though. However, there is no reason for her to give you her reason because it's none of your business.
 
taxslave
#154
Quote: Originally Posted by gerryhView Post

pro lifer is a misnomer. There are very few "pro lifers" but there are a hell of alot of anti abortionists. Just like pro choice is a misnomer. The baby has no choice in the matter.

I'd also like to add, that is it is the baby's who's life is the one that is the most profoundly effected by the "choice" being made.

There is no baby until it is breathing on its own.
 
Ariadne
#155
Quote: Originally Posted by KreskinView Post

How about she's carrying a baby with Turner's Syndrome and it has no eyes, then her husband and parents died in an auto-accident, plus she has been diagnosed with terminal cancer and she's being evicted and will be living on the street. I'm sure that's not good enough though. However, there is no reason for her to give you her reason because it's none of your business.

So we've got an unemployed, homeless, pregnant woman with terminal cancer?

Were these facts suddenly available when she was 33 weeks pregnant, or did she have ample time to put her ducks in order during the pregnancy? I actually don't believe that's possible. Pregnant women have blood tests done at he beginning of the pregnancy for obvious reasons. An abnormal white blood cell count would have been further explored ... so it would not take 33 weeks to identify terminal cancer.
 
In Between Man
#156
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

There is no baby until it is breathing on its own.

I've already shown you that is incorrect. Instead of making assertions, disprove this argument:

SLED: Defend the Unborn with Scott Klusendorf - YouTube (external - login to view)
 
JLM
+1
#157
Quote: Originally Posted by KreskinView Post

How about she's carrying a baby with Turner's Syndrome and it has no eyes, then her husband and parents died in an auto-accident, plus she has been diagnosed with terminal cancer and she's being evicted and will be living on the street. I'm sure that's not good enough though. However, there is no reason for her to give you her reason because it's none of your business.

And if your aunt had balls she'd be your uncle!

Quote: Originally Posted by bluebyrd35View Post

LOL, very bloody few. It is often those who get talked out of early term abortion that suffer the deep regrets, because they are the ones
who are saddled for life with an unwanted child and little or no support. Oh and what about that unwanted child??

As for that other stupid statement..... In the animal world, too young mothers simply eat their young. Severely,retarded girls certainly can get pregnant and they are certainly not capable of raising them alone. A boy of 13 or 14 can sire children, does that make them perfectly capable of supporting emotionally & physically the girl he impregnated?, never mind those he has sired?

With so many people who can't have children desperately wanting to adopt, that argument doesn't fly.
 
petros
#158
Quote: Originally Posted by KreskinView Post

The issue my health is none of your business.

That depends.
 
L Gilbert
#159
Quote: Originally Posted by In Between ManView Post

You are just reasserting yourself instead of adding anything to the debate. Listen to the video again, pick its argument apart bit and bit and tell us how each point it makes is incorrect. S - L - E - D

Not going to bother. The guy has some points, I expect, but I'd much rather read stuff than try to catch it off a vid. If you have a written transcript of it, I'll happily analyse it.

Quote:

So what gives anyone the right to sentence an unborn child to death to save the mother "inconvenience"?

I asked you first. And I'll add - since when is the death of a mother a mere "inconvenience" to her?
Quote:

And what gives anyone the right to sentence a human being to death because we "think" it will have a life filled with pain and misery?

Sorry, dude but a kid with anencephaly, Trisomy 18, Tay Sachs, Spina Bifida, Muscular Dystrophy, and a variety of other afflictions WILL suffer through its short life.

Quote:

Down Syndrome people overwhelmingly tell us they are happy, yet thousands possibly millions of them are murdered in the womb because we put no value on a Down Syndrome life. Sad.

I agree.

Then there's always the children of rape victims. I cannot imagine a rape victim caring much for a child born through rape. But, that's not in my list of reasons for abortion, because there's always adoption.

And that brings something to mind: you assume to know what my stance on abortion is before you bother to find out the parameters of my stance. That's extremely presumptuous and irrational.

Quote: Originally Posted by JLMView Post

There's an exception to every rule and that one I agree with................save the mother.

In many cases (with advances in medicine) we don't know how long a child will survive and the intensity of pain and misery!

I agre4e that it's hard to pin down the longevity of a person, but we DO know how much suffering can be involved with things like Spina Bifida, Muscular Dystrophy, Annecephaly, Cystic Fibrosis, etc. and we DO know these patients don't last as long as the norm.
 
Spade
+1
#160
Outlawing abortion would drive it underground -coathangers, eic.
I, as a man, cannot judge.
 
L Gilbert
+1
#161
Quote: Originally Posted by In Between ManView Post

Scary:
Margaret Sanger's Biggest Sin.

Post all the vids you want. I'll tell you the reason why I don't like vids; some won't allow me to return to particular spots in them without rerunning the entire vid, sometimes I can't understand what is being said because of bad enunciation, etc. Print is different.

Quote: Originally Posted by gerryhView Post

the OP is about a doctor that was performing late term abortions. As late as 36 weeks.

And I find that despicable and inexcusable.
Quote:

Naturally, the "pro choicers" could NEVER accept that even late term is wrong.

And that pitiful little opinion, to put it in your terms, is fµcking bullsh|t.

Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

It's not Pro-Choice. It's all Pro-Excuse and Pro-Irresponsibility.

ALL of it? Wrong.
 
petros
+1
#162
Norma McCorvey herself says it best.... "I was a very confused 21 year old...."

Jane Roe's prolife commercial - YouTube (external - login to view)
 
L Gilbert
#163
Quote: Originally Posted by AriadneView Post

"But state law also defines a fetus as "viable" if "there is a reasonable likelihood of the fetus' sustained survival outside the womb."

Brigham provided abortions to five patients ranging from 18 to 33 weeks pregnant, according to a report by the New Jersey State Board of Medical Examiners.

The determination of whether those fetuses were "viable" could occur in court."

Murder charges against doctors test Maryland abortion law - chicagotribune.com (external - login to view)

There is no question that a 33 week fetus is viable, so there really isn't any debate as to whether there was murder.

Read more about this doctor:

More trouble for abortion doctor, this time in Pennsylvania - Philly.com (external - login to view)

"Steven Chase Brigham, a physician whose medical license has been revoked, relinquished, or temporarily suspended in five states, is now facing regulatory and tax troubles that could jeopardize his chain of 15 abortion clinics.

...Brigham also has to deal with the IRS. In April, it placed $234,536 in liens against him for failing to pay payroll taxes from 2002 to 2006.

... In 1994, New York took his license, finding him guilty of "gross negligence" and "inexcusably bad judgment" involving two late-pregnancy abortions. The patients suffered life-threatening bleeding and required emergency hospital operations, public records show.

...In 1997, Brigham employed an obstetrician-gynecologist who was under suspension for, among other things, sexually molesting patients."

Good post.

Quote: Originally Posted by AriadneView Post

It seems the the abortion issue brings some very shady characters to the table. The doctor in question has a long history of legal problems, ranging from financial corruption to a complete disregard for the lives or wellfare of women and their fetuses. On the surface, I get he impression that he views abortion as an easy way to get rich.

I sincerely hope that he is found guilty and that this case does not dissolve into a debate about whether a child is viable at 33 weeks, or when life starts. If a 23 week fetus can be kept alive using currently available medical technologies, then a 33 week fetus that is yanked from its mother's womb and placed in a freezer is nothing short of murder.

I agree.
 
gerryh
#164
Quote: Originally Posted by damngrumpyView Post

The nutty right and their supporters are alive and well.

Quote: Originally Posted by gerryhView Post

How about you elaborate on that.



I see you chose to ignore my request DG. Is that because you can't support your hyperbole?
 
petros
#165
Quote: Originally Posted by L GilbertView Post

ALL of it? Wrong.

There are a few exceptions (not excuses).
 
L Gilbert
#166
Quote: Originally Posted by AriadneView Post

No one is "saddled" with an unwanted child. There are many people that want to adopt chidlren, many couples that pay thousands of dollars for invitro fertilization ... there is a huge industry surrounding producing babies, including medical advances to make 23 week fetuses thrive.

Yes. The biggest complaint I hear is the waiting period between application for adoption and actually getting the child.
 
gerryh
+2
#167
Quote: Originally Posted by L GilbertView Post

And I find that despicable and inexcusable.
And that pitiful little opinion, to put it in your terms, is fµcking bullsh|t.


Take a look at the responses to this OP. The VAST majority of those supporting abortion have NOT condemned this doctor. There has been NO condemnation of the persons that procured his services, and as a matter of fact, some have even gone so far as to imply that the good doctor should not be facing murder charges as the women were not killed during the "procedure". So, no, it's not fu cking bullshyte.
 
L Gilbert
#168
[QUOTE=petros;1530803]
Quote: Originally Posted by bluebyrd35View Post

A secretary? WOW!!!!

Yeah. We all know that secretaries are robots with no intelligence and no comprehension.
 
petros
+1
#169
Quote: Originally Posted by gerryhView Post

Take a look at the responses to this OP. The VAST majority of those supporting abortion have NOT condemned this doctor. There has been NO condemnation of the persons that procured his services, and as a matter of fact, some have even gone so far as to imply that the good doctor should not be facing murder charges as the women were not killed during the "procedure". So, no, it's not fu cking bullshyte.

With 35 fetuses in his freezer he's not much different than Dahmer.
 
gerryh
#170
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

With 35 fetuses in his freezer he's not much different than Dahmer.


I don't know. Did Dahmer keep his trophy's?
 
L Gilbert
#171
Quote: Originally Posted by AriadneView Post

If someone commits murder, society needs to do something to ensure that it doesn't happen again through punishment/rehabilitation. The doctor in question (in the article) appears to be a very shady character and I personally believe that if society doesn't step in, there will be more victims.

Probably.

Quote:

Is there any circumstance were abortion at 33 weeks gestation is justified? It's not like tests cannot be performed 20 weeks earlier and results known 17 weeks earlier.

Unless there are late term complications.
 
petros
#172
Quote: Originally Posted by gerryhView Post

I don't know. Did Dahmer keep his trophy's?

Yes. In the freezer and in barrels.
 
gerryh
+1
#173
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Yes. In the freezer and in barrels.


Then I concur, he is as bad as Dahmer.
 
L Gilbert
+1
#174
[QUOTE=JLM;1530840]
Quote: Originally Posted by bluebyrd35View Post


Bluebyrd- When you decide to have an abortion, what does the fetus get to decide? and who is acting on his/her behalf?

Give the fetus all the available information from conception to death and then let it decide for itself if it wants to live? What an odd idea.

Quote: Originally Posted by SpadeView Post

Outlawing abortion would drive it underground.....

There's always that point, as well. Another medical reason to allow certain abortions.

Quote: Originally Posted by gerryhView Post

Take a look at the responses to this OP. The VAST majority of those supporting abortion have NOT condemned this doctor. There has been NO condemnation of the persons that procured his services, and as a matter of fact, some have even gone so far as to imply that the good doctor should not be facing murder charges as the women were not killed during the "procedure". So, no, it's not fu cking bullshyte.

Jeeezez, you can be damned stunned sometimes. You said, "Naturally, the "pro choicers" could NEVER accept that even late term is wrong." My wife and I are both pro-choice and both of us consider late term abortions to be despicable and inexcusable. So, yes, your idiotic comment was straight BS.
FYI, we are both also pro-life. ANY life is precious and should not be stopped except for an extreme reason; survival being one of them, suffering for another.
 
gerryh
+3 / -1
#175
Let's be clear here. You are pro-life when it's convenient for you. Otherwise, you can justify killing.
 
JLM
#176
[QUOTE=L Gilbert;1530884]
Quote: Originally Posted by JLMView Post

Give the fetus all the available information from conception to death and then let it decide for itself if it wants to live? What an odd idea.

How is it odd?
 
L Gilbert
#177
[QUOTE=JLM;1530895]
Quote: Originally Posted by L GilbertView Post


How is it odd?

lmao It has something to do with the comprehension abilities of unborn babies.

Quote: Originally Posted by gerryhView Post

Let's be clear here. You are pro-life when it's convenient for you. Otherwise, you can justify killing.

Wrong. It has nothing to do with my convenience. Or even my wife's, for that matter.
Clear? Your clarity depends upon your flatulence.
 
JLM
+1
#178
[QUOTE=L Gilbert;1530898]
Quote: Originally Posted by JLMView Post

lmao It has something to do with the comprehension abilities of unborn babies.

That won't fly! Instinct to survive is not a matter of comprehension. Failure to communicate is not permission to kill the child!
 
gerryh
#179
Quote: Originally Posted by L GilbertView Post

Wrong. It has nothing to do with my convenience. Or even my wife's, for that matter.
Clear? Your clarity depends upon your flatulence.


lmao...ya...ok.... I'll just keep this off to the side for future use. That would be when you support the murder of fellow humans through war.

Quote: Originally Posted by JLMView Post


That won't fly! Instinct to survive is not a matter of comprehension. Failure to communicate is not permission to kill the child!


Sure it is, because in the pro murder crowd, the baby isn't human and therefore does not have the same rights as it's self centered mother.
 
JLM
#180
Quote: Originally Posted by gerryhView Post

lmao...ya...ok.... I'll just keep this off to the side for future use. That would be when you support the murder of fellow humans through war.




Sure it is, because in the pro murder crowd, the baby isn't human and therefore does not have the same rights as it's self centered mother.

Well, that makes it so much easier to understand since you put it that way. I should have guessed the baby not being human is a monkey or a rhinocerus!
 

Similar Threads

no new posts