[Vision2020] Is it Infanticide Vs. Abortion? (was:CatholicMajority On Suprem

Thu Apr 26 22:20:05 PDT 2007

I'm going to have to agree with Tony on this one.  I don't quite understand 
why this "procedure" is done to a partially born child.  I mean, if its the 
heart or some other defect that is afflicting the child, they would let it 
be born and then go from there.

This just sounds cruel and inhuman.  I can just bet the woman has guilt up 
the what-ever over it as well.  I mean, I certainly would not be able to 
live with the knowledge that I took part in such a barbaric means of 
eliminating a child's life that was partially born....no matter what the 
"defect" the child is born with.

Personally, I don't agree with abortion, but this just sounds like murder to 
me.  The child is breathing, moving, reactive, and almost-if-not-at birthing 
stage - why kill it like this?

J  :]

>From: "Tony" <tonytime at clearwire.net>
>To: "Andreas Schou" <ophite at gmail.com>
>CC: vision2020 at moscow.com
>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Is it Infanticide Vs. Abortion? 
>(was:CatholicMajority On Supreme Court)
>Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 20:20:49 -0700
>
>Cute Andreas, very cute.  But perhaps you will excuse me if I do not accept
>your contention where the very lives of society's most innocent members are
>concerned.  What specific documentation can you provide to support your
>insistence that partial birth abortions are NEVER performed on viable
>babies?  And you needn't waste any more of our time with irrelevant
>statistics as to the percentage of overall abortions this procedure
>constitutes.  One is one too many.  Also, my aspiring lawyer, please advise
>us as to what circumstances would require killing a woman's child when only
>the head remains inside in order to save her life.
>
>At least you are right about one thing: you are not qualified to render
>medical advice.  Nor are you qualified to parent children.  That requires
>compassion and a soul.
>
>Later,
>
>-Tony
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Andreas Schou" <ophite at gmail.com>
>To: "Tony" <tonytime at clearwire.net>
>Cc: <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 12:03 AM
>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Is it Infanticide Vs. Abortion? (was:
>CatholicMajority On Supreme Court)
>
>
> > On 4/25/07, Tony <tonytime at clearwire.net> wrote:
> >> Andreas, is it your contention then that intact dilation and extraction
> >> is
> >> performed on non-viable babies in EVERY case?  If so, why has such
> >> information never been divulged before now by the proponents of this
> >> "procedure?"  One suspects that there is, once again, more to the story
> >> than
> >> those on your side of this debate would have the public believe.
> >
> > It's my contention that it constitutes 0.2% of abortions, that it is
> > performed as an emergency surgery rather than elective abortion, and
> > that it is performed on non-viable fetuses.
> >
> > Late-term abortions constitute 1.4% of all abortions performed in the
> > United States. Intact D&E constitutes 15% of those.
> > Back-of-the-envelope calculations tell me that that means that intact
> > D&E is used in roughly 0.2% of all abortion procedures in the United
> > States.
> >
> > Kennedy's opinion is predicated on the fact that intact D&E is
> > medically equivalent to the interuterine dismemberment and suction of
> > the miscellaneous parts; that is, there is no circumstance under which
> > an intact D&E would save the life of the mother when other equivalent
> > processes could also be performed. This logic is designed specifically
> > to limit the ruling's scope.
> >
> > Notably, Kennedy leaves an opening for specific review of the law when
> > he specifically mentions that the court would entertain a case
> > considering that specific issue -- that is, whether a late-term
> > abortion would be medically necessary for the health or life of the
> > mother. How Kennedy expects that a challenge would reach the Supreme
> > Court in the (roughly) 90 days before the case is mooted by the birth
> > of a child or the death of a fetus is an exercise best left to the
> > imagination (or alternately sniggered at behind your hand).
> >
> >> That critical question aside, why are these handicapped infants not
> >> simply
> >> delivered and allowed to expire naturally, if that is indeed their 
>fate,
> >> rather than being unceremoniously dispatched?
> >
> > I am not qualified to deliver medical advice, but it is my
> > understanding that one cannot live without a functioning forebrain.
> > You, however, have left me somewhat unsure of this understanding.
> >
> > -- ACS
> >
> > * If you're interested, this Harpers article is a good overview of the
> > "partial-birth abortion" pseudo-debate:
> > http://www.harpers.org/archive/2004/11/0080278
> >
> > * Yes, it's a blog post. However, it's an ob/gyn med student's
> > overview of the medical literature on intact D&E, as well as what
> > exactly was made illegal by the partial-birth abortion law:
> > 
>http://www.agraphia.net/partial-birth-abortion-v-intact-dilation-extraction/
> >
> > * This is a personal account of someone who did have an intact D&E due
> > to (extremely severe) spinal bifida. It might explain why someone
> > might want to do it:
> > 
>http://lifestyle.msn.com/mindbodyandsoul/womenintheworld/articlemc.aspx?cp-documentid=4595719
> >
> >
>
>
>=======================================================
>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>                http://www.fsr.net
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>=======================================================

_________________________________________________________________
Interest Rates NEAR 39yr LOWS!  $430,000 Mortgage for $1,299/mo - Calculate 
new payment 
http://www.lowermybills.com/lre/index.jsp?sourceid=lmb-9632-19132&moid=14888