[Vision2020] Is it Infanticide Vs. Abortion? (was: CatholicMajority On Supreme Court)

[keely emerinemix]

If I had known that the criteria for being a good parent, for having compassion and a soul, was to agree with Tony on much of anything, I think I might have chosen not to take the risk and thus remain childless.keely> From: tonytime at clearwire.net> To: ophite at gmail.com> Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 20:20:49 -0700> CC: vision2020 at moscow.com> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Is it Infanticide Vs. Abortion? (was:	CatholicMajority On Supreme Court)> > 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> =======================================================
_________________________________________________________________
Connect to the next generation of MSN Messenger 
http://imagine-msn.com/messenger/launch80/default.aspx?locale=en-us&source=wlmailtagline
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20070427/f9366ce7/attachment.html