Roe vs Wade Overturned by US Supreme Court!

by Simon 173 Replies latest social current

• 

  GabeAthouse

  Chopping up just-delivered babies is simply sick and evil and anyone pushing for it should be investigated. Anyone who's done it for a non-medical reason should face the death penalty.

  
  

  I dont disagree with this. But every government statistic i've found states that less than 1% of abortions take place after 21 weeks and usually for medical reasons. The idea that lots of women reach 9 months and suddenly change their mind stretches credulity to me. The idea that their are also plenty of immoral, monstrous physicians willing to do this upon request also stretches credulity. Has it ever been done unnecessarily? Probably. But I suspect "late term abortion" is mostly a bogeyman used to appeal to people's emotions.
  
  To be clear, i'm not it any way stating its not a big deal simply because it's rare. But it has been used to push this idea that there is an epidemic of "chopping up full term babies".
  
• 

  sloppyjoe2

  @seabreeze Viability before 22 weeks is zero. There is no dependability. The body cannot depend on anything and still survive at that stage. Every example you give is after the person being born and they have a very high level of viability. I only proposed abortions before there is any chance of a life ever functioning on its own. If your answer is i don’t believe abortion is ever acceptable, that is fine. There are millions that agree with you.
• 

  Anony Mous

  @Gabe: abortions after viability have been illegal. So yes, they would in the minority. It doesn’t change that people are lobbying to make it legal, this has been part of the platform for the DNC. In NYS and California they are currently legal but were illegal under Roe v Wade, so we will have to see whether that ticks up, but if you aren’t opposed to killing a baby at 12 or 20 weeks, not sure why’d you be opposed to killing it at 12 months or 12 years.

  @sloppy: there are babies that have been viable before 22 weeks, science keeps moving that back further. There are people that have done embryo transplants as well. The point that abortion is the only option, is shrinking with science.
• 

  sloppyjoe2

  @anony mous, the most premature baby ever to survive was at 21 weeks. As science moves so do our laws. So then make the cutoff 20 weeks.
• 

  Sea Breeze

  @sloppyJoe

  Viability before 22 weeks is zero. There is no dependability. The body cannot depend on anything and still survive at that stage.

  Really? You don't need me to refute your reasoning. Just walk to the bathroom and look in the mirror. You will be looking at living proof that a 22 week old baby can survive in the right environment. You were once a 22 week old baby.
  
  We all are dependent on the "right environment". We are all viable or non viable depending on environment at any point in our lives since conception. Our age has NOTHING to do it. How long would you survive in space without a spacesuit? Are we supposed to write you off reasoning, poor 'ole Sloppyjoe, he just wasn't viable? Or, should we investigate the events leading up to you ending up outside the spaceship without a suit?
  
  
  
  
• 

  sloppyjoe2

  @seabreeze i see this is headed in no direction. Again as I said, if no abortions ever is your stance, there are millions that agree with that.
• 

  Diogenesister

  I have worked in SCBU. My own twins were prem and spent 4 weeks in SCBU.

  The earliest baby I have ever heard that survive are around 21 weeks. Not only is that rare, but these babies often have a lifetime of misery and suffering, frequently dying before they reach adulthood. Most midwives and SCBU doctors/nurses don't really approve of preserving the lives of extremely prem babies no matter what. I'm being frank here. They have seen the result of fighting to keep a barely viable baby alive.

  You will be looking at living proof that a 22 week old baby can survive in the right environment. You were once a 22 week old baby.

  Yes. The right environment was a uterus.

  Sea breeze As sloppyjoe said, if you don't believe in termination at any point that's fine. That's your opinion. But stating that terminations are wrong because we were all once 2 wks from conception or 12 weeks from conception is nonsensical.

  Arguing from that point would take us here:

  I am non viable because I cannot survive without a farmer growing me food. I am non viable because I cannot survive without a pharmacy making my blood pressure medication*.

  The fact is fetuses younger than 21/22 weeks cannot survive outside the womb no matter what. Most babies of 23 weeks and older, provided they have no other problems, can survive outside the womb and certainly at 24 weeks and over.

  My uncle was born prem in a time before modern SCBU units. My grandmother wrapped him in swaddling in front of the fire and fed him with a pipette. Babies 23/24 weeks actually can survive even without modern medicine. All they need is warmth and because their suck reflex hasn't come in yet they have to be fed with an NG tube for a few days.

  If we want to ban all abortion (except for maternal risk to life)we have to be ready to care for and love and support all mothers and babies. Considering there are kids of 4 and 5 running around on rubbish dumps just to get enough to eat, proves we as humans don't care enough about babies that are not our own offspring to make such a thing "viable".

  *An example if I were.
  
  
• 

  Diogenesister

  Just to also say if anyone thinks nurses and doctors are not revolted to our stomachs and broken hearted at the thoughts of fighting to the bitter end for a miscarriage that's almost 21 weeks old and yet a baby only maybe 5 days younger could be terminated.

  If you don't think it torments doctors at night, you have no feeling.

  Two things can be true at once. We can think along these lines, yet believe it's not for the best to keep a very sick baby with extreme mental retardation alive. It's a grey, grey world.

  And yes .....the thoughts of playing god is horrific
• 

  joey jojo

  A young guy and girl think they are in love. The girl gets pregnant -the guy runs away.

  The girl now has a life long burden to carry, on her own , with stigma and shame attached.

  Will her family step up and help her, or will they turn their back? Often, it may be her family that encourages the abortion. If she has the child and adopts it out, there is a minefield of feelings she has to work through for the rest of her life. Even if she can detach herself, laws are now in place for the child to know who their birth parents are, so she cant escape those feelings if the child tries to make contact.

  She has to face the struggle of being a single mum, or the chance that the new step-dad will abuse her, the child, or both. What kind of security can she offer the child, what about education?

  These issues are no joke for a young woman to have to deal with. Its understandable why some women dont like to be told how to live their lives by men.
• 

  Simon

  But every government statistic i've found states that less than 1% of abortions take place after 21 weeks and usually for medical reasons. ... Has it ever been done unnecessarily? Probably. But I suspect "late term abortion" is mostly a bogeyman used to appeal to people's emotions.

  Likewise with claims about rape and incest.

  It makes it all the more bizarre that they want to push for this to be allowed, given that it's so rarely necessary. it certainly shouldn't qualify as "elective".

  Viability before 22 weeks is zero. There is no dependability. The body cannot depend on anything and still survive at that stage

  Viability is the wrong thing to talk about. Science changes, and lots of people are not viable without medical care. Can we just kill all them too?

  I think 18 weeks is a safe limit. Plenty of time to make the choice.