One of the funniest things about the quotes pro-lifers use from the likes of Dr. Anand and others is that they themselves had no wish to become involved in the abortion debate, they are are doctors and/or scientists who report their findings to the scientific community .. how others use those findings is no relation to the opinion of the people who discovered them, in fact Dr. Anand has stated quite categorically that his research has nothing to do with abortion. Dr. Anand said he considered fetal pain likely at 18 to 24 weeks. But he added that the “issue of fetal pain does not have much relevance for abortion, since most abortions are performed before the fetus is capable of experiencing pain” and that for the “very few” abortions that occur after that time, techniques could be used that he believed would prevent pain. Dr. Anand has also stated he had intended to highlight science, not support anti-abortion views. Since 2005, “I’ve been asked to testify many, many times, and I’ve turned it down,” he said. “I feel it’s just gotten completely out of hand.” He said women and their doctors should make abortion decisions case by case. “In the very few abortions where fetal pain could possibly occur,” he said, “consider what can be done to avoid inflicting a lot of pain on the fetus.” He said a common method used after 20 weeks — injecting amniotic fluid or fetuses with heart-stopping medication before removing the fetus — “would be fine, really, from a point of view of fetal pain,” a “compassionate way to do it," if injections could not be done, he would recommend “some sort of fetal anesthesia.” Another favourite of pro-lifers is Dr. Bjorn Merker, a Swedish neuroscientist, who said in the journal Behavioral and Brain Sciences while studying five children with hydranencephaly, in which most or all of the cortex is missing, replaced with fluid, he said they appeared to smile and cry, and theorized that “the tacit consensus concerning the cerebral cortex as the ‘organ of consciousness’ ” may “be seriously in error.” Dr. Merker also stated, when finding out his research was being used by pro-lifers, that his research had only “marginal bearing” on fetal pain and “did not deal with pain specifically.” He added, “I was not aware that I had been cited in connection with the abortion issue,” and would not elaborate because politics has “infected” the issue. http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/09/17/2633271/scientists-fetal-pain/ http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/17/h...itics-of-fetal-pain.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&hp Why is it no surprise that pro-lifers are taking this research and twisting it to appear the doctors/scientists involved are supporting their anti-abortion agenda?
When did I say that? I'm not sure why you feel that difference is significant. Some older people or handicapped people are taken care of by a single person. If that person refuses care, the vulnerable individual could die.
Your theory seems to be that pro-life sites must be wrong because they disagree with you. Let's see if these pro-life sites are right. The question is: Are partial birth abortions usually elective? Here's an excerpt from the very liberal Slate magazine: Last fall, both the Washington Post and the Bergen Record ran front-page stories asserting that pro-choice groups underestimate the number of "intact dilation and extraction" (IDE) procedures, to use the medical term, that are performed. In a piece that pro-life groups circulated all over the place, the Bergen Record's Ruth Padawer showed that one clinic in Englewood, N.J., had performed 1,500 IDEs in 1994. That is 1,000 more than pro-choice groups claimed had been performed in the entire country. After interviewing doctors who perform the procedure, both papers concluded that only in very few instances was the IDE actually necessary to protect the woman's health. Another Slate article: A few late abortions are done for the mother's health, to save her, for example, from possible disaster caused by an infected uterus or a newly diagnosed heart condition. Most of the time, however, they are elective. An excerpt from National Review: Planned Parenthood explained, “The procedure, dilation and extraction (D&X), is extremely rare and done only in cases when the woman’s life is in danger or in cases of extreme fetal abnormality.” There were only 500 to 600 such cases a year. Moreover, NARAL and Planned Parenthood claimed, the fetus felt no pain, since anaesthesia given to the mother had already killed it. The press bought it. The Los Angeles Times reported that there were only 200 such abortions a year. “Typically, it is used in late pregnancies to save a mother’s life or after the detection of severe fetal abnormalities.” A New York Times story also echoed the abortion lobby’s talking points. USA Today, the New York Daily News, and syndicated columnist Ellen Goodman all repeated the claim that anaesthesia killed the fetus before the scissors made contact. None of these stories even acknowledged that pro-lifers disputed these claims. All of them were false. The claim about anaesthesia was debunked first. Martin Haskell, the abortionist who had first brought partial-birth abortion to public attention, had said in a 1993 interview that the fetus was not dead before the D&X began. Dr. Norig Ellison, the president of the American Society of Anesthesiologists, testified before the House that the claim that anesthesia killed the fetus was “entirely inaccurate” and dangerous to spread, since it could cause mothers to turn down anaesthesia to protect their unborn children. At this point, anaesthesia dropped out of the debate. In September 1996–after Congress had passed a bill banning partial-birth abortion and Bill Clinton had vetoed it–Ruth Padawer, a reporter for the Bergen County, New Jersey, Record, disclosed that a local clinic performed 1,500 partial-birth abortions per year. That was more than the abortion lobby and much of the media had claimed took place nationwide. Within days, David Brown and Barbara Vobejda reported in the Washington Post that it was “possible–and maybe even likely–that the majority of these abortions are performed on normal fetuses.” Their finding tracked with Haskell’s remark that 80 percent of the partial-birth abortions he performed were “purely elective.” Five months later, a bigger bombshell: Ron Fitzsimmons, executive director of the National Coalition of Abortion Providers, told American Medical News and the New York Times that he had “lied through [his] teeth” about partial-birth abortion. When Nightline interviewed him in November 1995, he had followed the party line: Partial-birth abortions were rare and performed only in extreme cases. In truth, he said, the vast majority were performed on healthy mothers with healthy babies. “The abortion rights folks know it, the anti-abortion folks know it, and so, probably, does everyone else.” He estimated that 3,000 to 5,000 were performed each year. So you are completely wrong. Please admit your error.
Great so these vulnerable unborn babies will be protected. The abortion industry abets racists and those who want to take advantage of the unfortunate. That's plain to see.
Here's how elites reduce populations the elite find inconvenient: http://www.worldbulletin.net/world/155252/israels-forced-birth-control-to-ethiopian-jews Abortion is another tool.
No. Quote: Dr. Norig Ellison, president of the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA), wrote to the Senate Judiciary Committee: Drugs administered to the mother, either local anesthesia administered in the paracervical area or sedatives/analgesics administered intramuscularly or intravenously, will provide little-to-no analgesia [pain relief] to the fetus. [Senate Judiciary Committee, Nov. 17, 1995 hearing record, page 226] On March 21, 1996, the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution conducted a public hearing on "The Effects of Anesthesia During a Partial-Birth Abortion." Four leading experts in the field testified that the fetuses/babies who are old enough to be "candidates" for partial-birth abortion possess the neurological equipment to respond to painful stimuli, whether or not the mother has been anesthetized. Opponents of the bill were unable to produce a single medical witness willing to testify in support of the claims that anesthesia kills the fetus or renders the fetus insensible to pain. [See House Judiciary Committee Hearing Record No. 73, March 21, 1996.) Dr. Jean A. Wright, associate professor of pediatrics and anesthesia at the Emory University School of Medicine in Atlanta, testified that recent research shows that by the stage of development that a fetus could be a "candidate" for a partial-birth abortion (20 weeks), the fetus "is more sensitive to pain than a full-term infant would be if subjected to the same procedures," Prof. Wright testified. These fetuses have "the anatomical and functional processes responsible for the perception of pain," and have "a much higher density of Opioid (pain) receptors" than older humans, she said. Link: https://www.nrlc.org/abortion/pba/pbafact/
Of course Michael New considered these sort of obvious objections. This article discusses and provides a link to one of the studies: http://www.lifenews.com/2008/09/18/state-3492/
Utterly irrelevant because there are no partial birth abortions. The vast majority of all abortions occur in the 1st trimester when the fetus is about the size of a cherry. Injecting a local anesthetic into the cervix, which is the opening to the uterus, means that it will numb the fetus which is attached to the wall of the uterus via the placenta. Just like your entire jaw does numb when the dentist gives you Novacaine. (Lidocaine is another version of novacain.) Anyone who says this doesn't happen is wrong. Do babies born with addictions have their own supply of drugs? Or do the drugs in the bloodstream pass through the placenta and into the fetus? Plenty of evidence exists of that happening so to imagine that it won't when Lidocaine is injected directly into the uterus is inane. So here are the actual drug facts without any partisan bias whatsoever. http://www.drugs.com/pro/lidocaine-injection.html
If fetal pain were really a concern to anti-choice proponents, one would think they would be a hell of a lot more concerned about the fact that many surgical procedures are performed on infants without benefit of anesthesia. Circumcision is an example. Until the 80s, analgesics were never given to newborns. Thankfully, some physicians now use anesthesia and analgesia for newborn circumcision. Its time we approached this issue like adults. The fact is, abortion is here to stay and we have a responsibility to make sure it is easy, fast, inexpensive and utterly painless for both the woman and the fetus. Bottom like is one's body is not and should not ever be under the control of any government or group or individual other than the (adult) owner of the body in question.
I am not wrong. You continue to quote unreliable sources. Fitzsimmons, for example, has admitted being a liar, so one cannot rely upon his testimony. Part of the confusion about the number of "partial birth abortions" performed is due to a difference in defining what is a "late-term" abortion. Since abortion is legal to 24 weeks, those performed earlier than that should not be called "late-term." Some, however, will call any abortion after 16 weeks "late-term", so with that definition, a few could be called "elective." Please note the reasons for 3rd trimester abortion listed in this article. OTOH, the Religious Tolerance site presents all sides of the question and so can be relied upon for accurate information. http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_late.htm Third-trimester abortions: Medical intervention to terminate pregnancies during the third trimester is quite rare. The Alan Guttmacher Institute estimates that 1% of all medical terminations of pregnancies are done at or after 21 weeks - (1994 data). It is sometimes done when the fetus has died in the womb. Termination of the life of a fetus is generally prohibited by medical societies' regulations after the 20th or 21st week of gestation. Exceptions do occur if required to save the life of the woman or avoid very serious, disabling health consequences. e.g.: bullet To save the life or health of a women experiencing a deteriorating health problem. This problem can rapidly grow worse with every day in late pregnancy, and can only be reversed by terminating the pregnancy. It is most often caused by diabetes or heart disease. bullet A midwifery web site quotes Dr. William F. Harrison, a diplomate of the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2 He wrote that "approximately 1 in 2000 fetuses develop hydrocephalus while in the womb." About 5,000 fetuses develop hydrocephalus each year in the U.S. This is not usually discovered until late in the second trimester. A fetus with severe hydrocephalus is alive, but cannot live for long; it will never achieve consciousness. bullet In rare cases, the delivery of the fetus can go terribly wrong, threatening the life of the woman. As of 2003-OCT-9, their options are limited. The main ones are: bullet Hysterotomy: This involves major surgery. It is essentially identical to a Caesarian Section. It involves significantly higher risk to a woman than a D&X. bullet "D&X" (dilation and extraction). The third method is often popularly called "Partial Birth Abortion" although that is not a medical term.
Nothing in that article even comes close to mentioning abortion .. so utter failure on your part. Apart from that it is a disgusting thing to do, no person should be given any type of medication without their consent, just as no person should be forced to remain pregnant against their consent. So you say, now where is the evidence?
I did not say PP forced minority women to have abortions. You are being dishonest. In the US pro-abortion elites are only able to lie to vulnerable women. Now in some countries the abortion industry does force women to get abortions. http://www.thenewamerican.com/cultu...tions-in-china-chen-guangcheng-tells-congress And here's some history about forced sterilizations in India: Gandhi put her son Sanjay personally in charge of the new population offensive. He took to his job with gusto. Overt coercion became the rule: sterilization was a condition for land allotments, water, electricity, ration cards, medical care, pay raises, and rickshaw licenses. Policemen were given quotas to nab individuals for sterilization. Demolition squads were sent into slums to bulldoze houses — sometimes whole neighborhoods — so that armed police platoons could drag off their flushed-out occupants to forced-sterilization camps. In Delhi alone, 700,000 people were driven from their homes. Many of those who escaped the immediate roundup were denied new housing until they accepted sterilization. These attacks provoked resistance, with thousands being killed in battles with the police, who used live ammunition to deal with protesters. When it became clear that Muslim villages were also being selectively targeted, the level of violence increased still further. The village of Pipli was only brought into submission when government officials threatened locals with aerial bombardment. As the director of family planning in Maharashtra explained, “You must consider it something like a war.... Whether you like it or not, there will be a few dead people.” More on sterilization in India: http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2013-06-20/inside-indias-female-sterilization-camps Lying to vulnerable women, forced abortion, forced sterilization - elites use various methods to reduce populations the elite find inconvenient. Okay, but a caretaker may devote their whole life to sustaining a handicapped or elderly person.
According to Web MD: At the end of the first trimester: By the end of the third month of pregnancy, your baby is fully formed. Your baby has arms, hands, fingers, feet, and toes and can open and close its fists and mouth. Fingernails and toenails are beginning to develop and the external ears are formed. The beginnings of teeth are forming. Your baby's reproductive organs also develop, but the baby's gender is difficult to distinguish on ultrasound. The circulatory and urinary systems are working and the liver produces bile. At the end of the third month, your baby is about 7.6 -10 cm (3-4 inches) long and weighs about 28g (1 ounce). Since your baby's most critical development has taken place, your chance of miscarriage drops considerably after three months into the pregnancy. You provided evidence that local anesthetics can cause varying degrees of fetal and neonatal toxicity. You did not provide evidence of pain relief. Late term abortions are still being performed.
Why do you feel Slate magazine and the Washington Post are unreliable sources? Ron Fitzsimmons, the executive director of the National Coalition of Abortion Providers, lied to further his career. He had no reason to lie about the horrors of the abortion industry. So sometimes it is not prohibited. And sometimes medical societies' regulations are ignored when money is to be made. http://www.abqjournal.com/317703/opinion/lateterm-abortions-all-about-the-money.html http://heartsunitedforlife.com/?page_id=243 Another interesting article: http://www.aaplog.org/american-issues-2/late-term-abortion/is-late-term-abortion-ever-necessary/ I think that means they buttress your liberal preconceptions.
No but apparently you flunked grammar. Yet another anti abort that can not figure out the difference between a noun and a descriptive adjective.
Naked claims are not worth much. Do you have any examples these lies you refer to ? One hears the anti aborts lie, and compulsively spew fallacy. Claiming a single human cell is a baby. Claiming that Science has proven that a zygote is a human. Often these anti aborts cant figure out the difference between the term "human life" and the term " a human". Not the sharpest tools in the shed.
Gee, hard to catch your "MOVING GOALPOSTS" but I'll nail down your accusation that PP FORCED women to have abortions because THAT is what we were discussing. PP has NEVER forced abortions on any ethnic group. They have forced NO ONE. They are placed where the need is greatest...and rich neighborhoods, where the wealthy have access to everything including health care, don't need PP. You: ""Okay, but a caretaker may devote their whole life to sustaining a handicapped or elderly person"" That has absolutely nothing to do with abortion or biological dependency of the fetus .....that caretaker may do a lot of things like change their mind and not be the caretaker...it has NO relevance to abortion. None.
Irrelevant deflection. 90% of all abortions occur in the first 12 weeks. Ignorance of how anesthesia works is no excuse. 3rd trimester abortions are when women who want a child discover that there are serious fetal abnormalities or risks to their own health.
You seem to be under some illusion that women have to adhere to what you desire. BTW there is no "brutality".
Why are you off topic in your own thread? 5. TROLLING OR DERAILING A DISCUSSION If you don't want to discuss the topic, stay out of the thread. Posts that are, in the judgment of moderators or administrators, intended to disrupt a discussion rather than actually contribute to it will be considered trolling.
