(01-29-2019 07:05 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Tigergreen,

I would not support any law that denied abortion in the extreme (and extremely rare) circumstances cited by the doc. But there are abortion mills that have much less integrity than that doc, and you and I both know that (or at least certainly should).

I’m supposed to have a baby tomorrow and I just changed my mind and don’t want to. Okay, sign here and we can take care of it.

That’s not what this doc is apparently doing, but the apparent fact that she isn’t does not mean that there aren’t plenty who do. So how do we shut down the abortion mills without infringing too greatly on the situations where termination really is the right answer?

Agreed, there are legit cases, but they make up a very low percentage, the rest are murdered babies.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(01-29-2019 01:53 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-29-2019 01:50 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(01-29-2019 10:34 AM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(01-29-2019 07:05 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Tigergreen,

I would not support any law that denied abortion in the extreme (and extremely rare) circumstances cited by the doc. But there are abortion mills that have much less integrity than that doc, and you and I both know that (or at least certainly should).

I’m supposed to have a baby tomorrow and I just changed my mind and don’t want to. Okay, sign here and we can take care of it.

That’s not what this doc is apparently doing, but the apparent fact that she isn’t does not mean that there aren’t plenty who do. So how do we shut down the abortion mills without infringing too greatly on the situations where termination really is the right answer?

That’s the thing - if I remember the stat from earlier in the thread, 90-95% of elective abortions happen in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. There simply isn’t an epidemic of late term abortions where healthy women are choosing to terminate healthy pregnancies. That doesn’t mean there aren’t a few, but THOSE are the outliers; not the medical necessities.

Then why this law?

Mostly, to allow abortions late in the pregnancy where either the health of the mother or the baby suddenly becomes at stake.

Baloney.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(01-29-2019 07:05 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Tigergreen,

I would not support any law that denied abortion in the extreme (and extremely rare) circumstances cited by the doc. But there are abortion mills that have much less integrity than that doc, and you and I both know that (or at least certainly should).

I’m supposed to have a baby tomorrow and I just changed my mind and don’t want to. Okay, sign here and we can take care of it.

That’s not what this doc is apparently doing, but the apparent fact that she isn’t does not mean that there aren’t plenty who do. So how do we shut down the abortion mills without infringing too greatly on the situations where termination really is the right answer?

Dude...c'mon. You know this will hardly if ever be happening. It's just more scare form the pro-life crowd.

And "plenty?"

Again, there is not a political solution to abortion.

(01-29-2019 03:37 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(01-29-2019 07:05 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Tigergreen,

I would not support any law that denied abortion in the extreme (and extremely rare) circumstances cited by the doc. But there are abortion mills that have much less integrity than that doc, and you and I both know that (or at least certainly should).

I’m supposed to have a baby tomorrow and I just changed my mind and don’t want to. Okay, sign here and we can take care of it.

That’s not what this doc is apparently doing, but the apparent fact that she isn’t does not mean that there aren’t plenty who do. So how do we shut down the abortion mills without infringing too greatly on the situations where termination really is the right answer?

Agreed, there are legit cases, but they make up a very low percentage, the rest are murdered babies.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Rubbish. You've got this completely backwards.

(01-29-2019 04:02 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-29-2019 03:37 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(01-29-2019 07:05 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Tigergreen,

I would not support any law that denied abortion in the extreme (and extremely rare) circumstances cited by the doc. But there are abortion mills that have much less integrity than that doc, and you and I both know that (or at least certainly should).

I’m supposed to have a baby tomorrow and I just changed my mind and don’t want to. Okay, sign here and we can take care of it.

That’s not what this doc is apparently doing, but the apparent fact that she isn’t does not mean that there aren’t plenty who do. So how do we shut down the abortion mills without infringing too greatly on the situations where termination really is the right answer?

Agreed, there are legit cases, but they make up a very low percentage, the rest are murdered babies.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Rubbish. You've got this completely backwards.

So you are saying in 50% of black pregnancies the mother’s life is in danger?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(01-29-2019 02:03 PM)Paul M Wrote:  

(01-29-2019 02:01 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-29-2019 01:58 PM)Paul M Wrote:  Um, it's not to protect women and doctors removing a dead baby from a womb as Tigergreen has claimed.

I'm not saying it is. My take is that it's to handle complications to either the baby or the mother late in the pregnancy.

And abortions late in the pregnancy are ridiculously expensive from what I've read. It's not going to be this vanity trend the pro-life is crowd is playing it up to be!

Thus my naming the poster who did.

I’ve shown multiple situations where women have shared their experiences and shared that in some cases, hospitals wouldn’t do the procedures due to laws on the books. If you don’t get that N.Y. decided to create this law to protect women in those late-term circumstances, I can’t help you.

(01-29-2019 03:35 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(01-28-2019 11:40 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(01-28-2019 06:30 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(01-28-2019 04:57 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(01-28-2019 07:41 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  General question for the pro-baby murder supporters. After 24 weeks, what medical condition might a woman face that is only solved by abortion?

First off, no one is a "pro-baby murder supporter." People realize this isn't about women who just wake up one morning & decide the don't want to be pregnant - it is a much, much more involved, nuanced situation.

Just one example:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nati...h/1644839/

Cecily Kellogg, 44, a writer who lives near Philadelphia, says that was the situation she faced when she was nearly six months pregnant with twin boys in 2004 and developed severe preeclampsia. One fetus had already died and "my liver had shut down, my kidneys had shut down and they were expecting me to start seizing at any minute," she says. The doctors said they had to quickly dilate her cervix and perform an abortion to save her. "I fought it," she says. "But they told me I would die — that it was either me and my son or just my son."


Of course, those who want to keep their head in the sand will not think this is "real" just because it's on FB, or "proof" that late-term abortions are sometimes not only needed for the health of the mother, but a more humane choice than their baby struggling.

In this case, the woman had to go to a different hospital because the one she was scheduled to go to would not perform the procedure as a Catholic hospital. That's their choice, of course, but again, in NY, this would not have been allowed, period.

(The mother's post below link - warning - the pictures are tough to see:)

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?s...08&__xts__[0]=68.ARAxtGCThTF_fz3fdH6qopIj8dvO1VhGqywilWDg_MIbkOY7SYxPC0BANFiezjbpZdXc-DmSGrYbiHE7nqM8_9P9It5r9NNHXswnsRdUJxcYXT3g7s-FlJicyT8UL5_egrEX1lW_VoKiYTlquQ5-pc7oHlQN-siSvBhNRDQcrSI1lYQCt89vAXCZ6AAonwzlvAL6AS4wXHVzO0_HlKTPhiFhd3a26ezU124J0vzHBMIwpuk&__tn__=C-R

These photos are raw. They are real. The law recently passed in New York re: late term abortion? This is what this law was passed for. It wasnt passed because people just change their minds at the end of the pregnancy and decide to kill their babies. These are pregnancies where the child can't survive. Pregnancies that threaten the mother's life. Babies that pass in the womb but hospitals wont induce until close to the due date. Caelyn was to be delivered at St Joes. It was clear he would not survive no matter what we did as his condition became worse at every scan. St Joes, being a Catholic hospital, would NOT induce the pregnancy, even though it had even become a health risk for me to continue carrying him. I had to deliver him at UW Seattle Hospital because they were the only ones willing to perform a "late term abortion" (27 weeks), because, medically, that is what we were doing. We were ending a pregnancy with the knowledge that our son would not survive. If you feel what we did was wrong, see yourself off my friend's list and away from my post. I love my son. I miss my son. I wish more than anything everyday that my son were here. I should be planning his 3rd birthday. If you think for one second I wanted to end his life, you are greatly mistaken.

Edit to add since this has been shared so many times: Caelyn had hydrops fetalis caused by a condition called Sly Syndrome. He was the 8th case to occur in the US according to our geneticist. He also had severe dwarfism, clubbed feet, and numerous other conditions.

Quit finding these rare cases, most of them it is just a form of birth control.

“Quit finding these cases where it applies to exactly what was asked about.”

Sorry it bothers some of you that there are indeed cases where this is warranted. NOT wanted, however.

What are the majority of them?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Medically necessary, whether to protect the health of the mother, another fetus in a multiple birth, or to keep the fetus that has no chance of survival outside the womb from suffering in a “normal” birth.

(01-29-2019 03:37 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(01-29-2019 07:05 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Tigergreen,

I would not support any law that denied abortion in the extreme (and extremely rare) circumstances cited by the doc. But there are abortion mills that have much less integrity than that doc, and you and I both know that (or at least certainly should).

I’m supposed to have a baby tomorrow and I just changed my mind and don’t want to. Okay, sign here and we can take care of it.

That’s not what this doc is apparently doing, but the apparent fact that she isn’t does not mean that there aren’t plenty who do. So how do we shut down the abortion mills without infringing too greatly on the situations where termination really is the right answer?

Agreed, there are legit cases, but they make up a very low percentage, the rest are murdered babies.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

BS. In regards to late term abortions, most are not “elective” involving healthy mothers and fetuses. They are nuanced situations with problems involving the fetus, mother, a birth or multiples, or all of the above.

(01-29-2019 11:37 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(01-29-2019 03:37 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(01-29-2019 07:05 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Tigergreen,

I would not support any law that denied abortion in the extreme (and extremely rare) circumstances cited by the doc. But there are abortion mills that have much less integrity than that doc, and you and I both know that (or at least certainly should).

I’m supposed to have a baby tomorrow and I just changed my mind and don’t want to. Okay, sign here and we can take care of it.

That’s not what this doc is apparently doing, but the apparent fact that she isn’t does not mean that there aren’t plenty who do. So how do we shut down the abortion mills without infringing too greatly on the situations where termination really is the right answer?

Agreed, there are legit cases, but they make up a very low percentage, the rest are murdered babies.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

BS. In regards to late term abortions, most are not “elective” involving healthy mothers and fetuses. They are nuanced situations with problems involving the fetus, mother, a birth or multiples, or all of the above.

So half of black pregnancies were medically necessary abortions. Sorry, don’t buy it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(01-29-2019 11:33 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(01-29-2019 02:03 PM)Paul M Wrote:  

(01-29-2019 02:01 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-29-2019 01:58 PM)Paul M Wrote:  Um, it's not to protect women and doctors removing a dead baby from a womb as Tigergreen has claimed.

I'm not saying it is. My take is that it's to handle complications to either the baby or the mother late in the pregnancy.

And abortions late in the pregnancy are ridiculously expensive from what I've read. It's not going to be this vanity trend the pro-life is crowd is playing it up to be!

Thus my naming the poster who did.

I’ve shown multiple situations where women have shared their experiences and shared that in some cases, hospitals wouldn’t do the procedures due to laws on the books. If you don’t get that N.Y. decided to create this law to protect women in those late-term circumstances, I can’t help you.

I asked for verification of your claims that it's illegal to assist a woman with a dead baby in her womb. You have offered zero proof of your claim. There is no law forcing women to carry dead babies.

I can share my Trojan war experiences with you if you like. I'll post 'em to "Factbook" if that helps.

(01-29-2019 05:30 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(01-29-2019 04:02 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-29-2019 03:37 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(01-29-2019 07:05 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Tigergreen,

I would not support any law that denied abortion in the extreme (and extremely rare) circumstances cited by the doc. But there are abortion mills that have much less integrity than that doc, and you and I both know that (or at least certainly should).

I’m supposed to have a baby tomorrow and I just changed my mind and don’t want to. Okay, sign here and we can take care of it.

That’s not what this doc is apparently doing, but the apparent fact that she isn’t does not mean that there aren’t plenty who do. So how do we shut down the abortion mills without infringing too greatly on the situations where termination really is the right answer?

Agreed, there are legit cases, but they make up a very low percentage, the rest are murdered babies.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Rubbish. You've got this completely backwards.

So you are saying in 50% of black pregnancies the mother’s life is in danger?

Apologies, I did not know you were just referring to all African-American abortions. I thought you were referring directly to the cases for late-term abortions, saying next to none of them were for legit cases of baby/mother health.

I just read where Virginia is proposing similar legislation.

Interesting that they are willing to have taxpayers pay for this, also eliminating 2nd opinion before doing murder. They also wrote it would be easier for low income and blacks to access these. This tells me their is a racist tilt to this as the legislature is making it easier for blacks. Somewhere Margaret Sanger is smiling.

If you want a link look for it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(01-30-2019 10:09 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-29-2019 05:30 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(01-29-2019 04:02 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-29-2019 03:37 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(01-29-2019 07:05 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Tigergreen,

I would not support any law that denied abortion in the extreme (and extremely rare) circumstances cited by the doc. But there are abortion mills that have much less integrity than that doc, and you and I both know that (or at least certainly should).

I’m supposed to have a baby tomorrow and I just changed my mind and don’t want to. Okay, sign here and we can take care of it.

That’s not what this doc is apparently doing, but the apparent fact that she isn’t does not mean that there aren’t plenty who do. So how do we shut down the abortion mills without infringing too greatly on the situations where termination really is the right answer?

Agreed, there are legit cases, but they make up a very low percentage, the rest are murdered babies.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Rubbish. You've got this completely backwards.

So you are saying in 50% of black pregnancies the mother’s life is in danger?

Apologies, I did not know you were just referring to all African-American abortions. I thought you were referring directly to the cases for late-term abortions, saying next to none of them were for legit cases of baby/mother health.

None necessary, I was hitting on all abortions, either you or someone else mentioned health issues. Blacks abort 50% of pregnancies, point I was making is not 50% of black pregnancies are health related.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(01-29-2019 04:01 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-29-2019 07:05 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Tigergreen,

I would not support any law that denied abortion in the extreme (and extremely rare) circumstances cited by the doc. But there are abortion mills that have much less integrity than that doc, and you and I both know that (or at least certainly should).

I’m supposed to have a baby tomorrow and I just changed my mind and don’t want to. Okay, sign here and we can take care of it.

That’s not what this doc is apparently doing, but the apparent fact that she isn’t does not mean that there aren’t plenty who do. So how do we shut down the abortion mills without infringing too greatly on the situations where termination really is the right answer?

Dude...c'mon. You know this will hardly if ever be happening. It's just more scare form the pro-life crowd.

And "plenty?"

Again, there is not a political solution to abortion.

Circle that square

(01-30-2019 12:02 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  I just read where Virginia is proposing similar legislation.

Interesting that they are willing to have taxpayers pay for this, also eliminating 2nd opinion before doing murder. They also wrote it would be easier for low income and blacks to access these. This tells me their is a racist tilt to this as the legislature is making it easier for blacks. Somewhere Margaret Sanger is smiling.

If you want a link look for it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Virginia Democrats Propose Bill Allowing Abortions Until Birth

“Where it’s obvious that a woman is about to give birth, that she has physical signs that she is about to give birth, would that still be a point at which she could request an abortion if she was so certified?” Gilbert asked.

“She’s dilating,” he continued, using the term for a woman’s cervix naturally opening to allow a baby to exit his mother during birth. “I’m asking if your bill allows that.”

“My bill would allow that, yes,” she said.

https://thefederalist.com/2019/01/30/vir...ons-birth/

Seems like the Gov of VA is almost suggesting you should be allowed to kill a baby after the baby is born.

“If a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen,” he continued. “The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/vi...fants-die/

https://freebeacon.com/issues/northman-o...he-mother/

Here is another article on VA governor promoting post birth murder

(01-30-2019 01:29 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(01-30-2019 12:02 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  I just read where Virginia is proposing similar legislation.

Interesting that they are willing to have taxpayers pay for this, also eliminating 2nd opinion before doing murder. They also wrote it would be easier for low income and blacks to access these. This tells me their is a racist tilt to this as the legislature is making it easier for blacks. Somewhere Margaret Sanger is smiling.

If you want a link look for it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Virginia Democrats Propose Bill Allowing Abortions Until Birth

“Where it’s obvious that a woman is about to give birth, that she has physical signs that she is about to give birth, would that still be a point at which she could request an abortion if she was so certified?” Gilbert asked.

“She’s dilating,” he continued, using the term for a woman’s cervix naturally opening to allow a baby to exit his mother during birth. “I’m asking if your bill allows that.”

“My bill would allow that, yes,” she said.

https://thefederalist.com/2019/01/30/vir...ons-birth/

Seems like the Gov of VA is almost suggesting you should be allowed to kill a baby after the baby is born.

“If a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen,” he continued. “The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/vi...fants-die/

Virginia democrats are overconfident with their new found power. The New York democrats have learned to tap dance around it with the academic redwingtom shite. In Virginia, they are flat out admitting they are legalizing murder. I pray Virginia hasn't gone that far left and this, along with all the nanny state laws they are passing, backfires bigly.

(01-30-2019 01:23 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(01-29-2019 04:01 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-29-2019 07:05 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Tigergreen,

I would not support any law that denied abortion in the extreme (and extremely rare) circumstances cited by the doc. But there are abortion mills that have much less integrity than that doc, and you and I both know that (or at least certainly should).

I’m supposed to have a baby tomorrow and I just changed my mind and don’t want to. Okay, sign here and we can take care of it.

That’s not what this doc is apparently doing, but the apparent fact that she isn’t does not mean that there aren’t plenty who do. So how do we shut down the abortion mills without infringing too greatly on the situations where termination really is the right answer?

Dude...c'mon. You know this will hardly if ever be happening. It's just more scare form the pro-life crowd.

And "plenty?"

Again, there is not a political solution to abortion.

Circle that square

That's enough to make me want to throw up

(01-30-2019 01:42 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(01-30-2019 01:23 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(01-29-2019 04:01 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-29-2019 07:05 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Tigergreen,

I would not support any law that denied abortion in the extreme (and extremely rare) circumstances cited by the doc. But there are abortion mills that have much less integrity than that doc, and you and I both know that (or at least certainly should).

I’m supposed to have a baby tomorrow and I just changed my mind and don’t want to. Okay, sign here and we can take care of it.

That’s not what this doc is apparently doing, but the apparent fact that she isn’t does not mean that there aren’t plenty who do. So how do we shut down the abortion mills without infringing too greatly on the situations where termination really is the right answer?

Dude...c'mon. You know this will hardly if ever be happening. It's just more scare form the pro-life crowd.

And "plenty?"

Again, there is not a political solution to abortion.

Circle that square

That's enough to make me want to throw up

But guys, Tom is cool with that because it's not like it's going to happen that often.