Obama and abortion - position shifts for evangelicals

quote:

---

Originally posted by M. Spector:
[b]20-week fetuses cannot "survive on their own" without massive medical intervention and artificial life support, any more than you can survive on your own after your heart stops beating or your brain waves flatline.

My point is that if you want to adopt "survival on one's own" as some sort of criterion, you will have to a) explain why that should be the criterion and b) define what you mean by survival on one's own.

You will also have to figure out how to determine the exact age of the fetus in order to decide whether to keep it on life support or not. "Around 20 weeks" is not nearly accurate enough for the kind of life-or-death decisions you want to make, and for which medical malpractice insurers will have to adjust their premiums accordingly.[/b]

---

True - but why do we spend healthcare dollars keeping premature babies alive? My "around 20 weeks" statement is based on the capabilities of the current technology to save premature babies.

The capabilities occur after 25 weeks, no sooner, and even then there are serious issues for a 26-28 week fetus.

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
[b]The capabilities occur after 25 weeks, no sooner, and even then there are serious issues for a 26-28 week fetus.[/b]

---

Or Remind knows better, I cross-posted. :-)

Abortions being performed post 20 weeks are the most tragic because they are done under the most extreme circumstances. Even at that, a mother's whose life is threatened has the right to chose against termination and sacrifice her life. Other extreme circumstances might include the fetus being dead or unlikely to be a viable birth. These are situations that come down to a woman and her physician and the fetus fascists are absolutely cruel to impose limits and criminality to late term abortions. All it is is a ruse to introduce the concept of limits until they can finally achieve the complete criminalization of abortions. Any limit, no matter how innocuous or seemingly compassionate (like Bill C-484) is an assault on women's reproductive rights.

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
[b]Frankly, I do not believe that any abortions are tragic and dislike the use of that term completely. What I would call tragic would be when, or if, women are denied their choice.[/b]

---

Yep, that.

If men and women had children this whole abortion thing would never have become the debacle the right-wing and religious fundamentalists have made it into because men would never have allowed it to be anything other than a personal choice, nothing more difficult to make than having an ingrown toenail treated. Let's be real, abortion as an issue is tied with a big knot to the larger issue of male chauvanism.

Obviously, a poor turn of phrase on my part. I was just thinking of personal cases where the woman very much wanted the pregnancy and is suddenly presented with an extreme situation. I didn't mean to imply that abortions are tragic or any other "nuanced" double speak.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ghislaine:
[b]So even though you agree that fetuses are viable at around 24 weeks, you still believe they should be aborted rather than cared for in the same manner as preemies of the same age? (With no obligation on the mother of course)[/b]

---

What do you NOT get about 25 weeks? It is NOT "around 24 weeks", it is a full 25 weeks going into the 26th week.

Now, having said that, I personally do not even agree with trying to save a 26-28 week fetus that is born prematurely. So, my answer would be NO.

[ 09 July 2008: Message edited by: remind ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
[b]

What do you NOT get about 25 weeks? It is NOT "around 24 weeks", it is a full 25 weeks going into the 26th week.

Now, having said that, I personally do not even agree with trying to save a 26-28 week fetus that is born prematurely. So, my answer would be NO.

[ 09 July 2008: Message edited by: remind ][/b]

---

You don't agree with trying to save preemies??? Why the hell not?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:
[b]How the heck has this thread descended into a debate about abortion? Ghislaine, please remember which forum you're posting in. In case you haven't noticed, abortion is not up for debate on babble.[/b]

---

I am not debating a woman's right to choose - I was stating support for Obama's original position that once a fetus is viable outside the womb, it should be kept alive, rather than killed. That number would need to be determined by medical professionals. Remind claims it he time is around 25-26 weeks. This is similar to the legislation currently in place in most European countries.

This does not in the least affect a woman's right to choose - as she has no obligation to the child afterwards and the HUGE MAJORITY of abortions occur many weeks before that point. It would only be to ensure that if a woman did want an abortion at such a late date and the fetus is viable, that it would be kept alive. I merely want to say that I support Obama's original position (which will no doubt change 100 more times prior to the election and after).

How does any of the above in any way contradict a woman's right to choose or interfere with her ownership of her own body?

I am also still trying to understand what Remind would have doctors do to prematurely-born babies and at what week she would allow our healthcare system to keep them alive?

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
[b]

Most do not live under 28 weeks, and those that do have significant medical problems and developmental problems that the treatment of, if it is even possible, is, in my view, inhumane.[/b]

---

Okay, I will stop the thread drift after this... but my response is SO???? Many babies born after 9 months have significiant medical problems.

I am glad you don't author healthcare policy as I would hate to see you trying to tell a new parent why their preemie born at 26 weeks is not getting medical care!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:
[b]How the heck has this thread descended into a debate about abortion?[/b]

---

The third word in the thread's title? [img]wink.gif" border="0[/img]

[ 09 July 2008: Message edited by: Threads ]

Ghislaine will not go further with you in this matter, it is quite obvious we disaagree. I view it without emotional bias, while you view it with emotional bias.

So, let's just leave it with me stating again I do not [b]personally[/b] believe there should be medical intervention in trying to keep a pre-mature fetus alive prior to 28 weeks. A baby born with birth defects, at full term, is way more capable of enduring medical intervention, as they are fully done developing. Unlike the pre-maturely born fetus, who have little lung development, and a circulatory system that cannot withstand nor take the medical interventions required, plus little or no renal development. And I won't even go into the pain they endure.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ghislaine:
[b]I will leave it at that then.[/b]

---

No, you did not actually.

quote:

---

[b] Just as an FYI - if you did give birth to a preemie baby in reality and tried to put into practice your personal views, the medical staff would not only ignore your views but alert child welfare authorities who would remove the child from your care.[/b]

---

Again your personal emotional view commentary means little to the discussion, all you are attempting to do is to try and paint me as uncaring.

In actual fact, there can be a DNR on a fetus that is born pre-maturely.

Uh, you do understand that most prematurally born do not in fact breathe upon their own? In particular the very prematurely born have no lung capacity.

It would seem that perhaps you allow your emotions to conduct your professional behaviour, and that is too bad, if you do.

This is what women will see if McCain is elected. Think about it!

[url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/opinions/cartoonsandvideos/telnaes/... [img]frown.gif" border="0[/img]

quote:

---

Originally posted by M. Spector:
[b]What, cheesy "cartoons"?[/b]

---

It wasn't a cheesy cartoon for many women of my generation, it was reality.

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
[b]Welcome bitsey, thank you for the cartoon, and I agree the cartoon is NOT cheesy, and will say that mspector was out of line saying so.[/b]

---

Thank you for your words and your welcome.

I love Ann Telnaes' work.

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:

These are scarey times again for women with the full on press to take away our human rights, by men intent on not giving up their supremacy.

---

We have to keep opening minds or we will find ourselves reliving those days.

Patricia Goodwin, of Marblehead, shyly gives Steinem a book of her poems, softly saying, "You changed my life. You said a chance remark about abortion. It opened my mind to thinking in a different way."

Steinem brightens. "You know who said that? Years ago, I was in a taxi in Boston or Cambridge. There was an old Irish woman taxi driver. Flo Kennedy, the civil rights activist, was my speaking partner at the time. We were sitting in the back talking about abortion and the taxi driver turned around and she said, 'Honey, if men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament.' And I've always been so sorry that I didn't get her name."

[url=http://www.boston.com/ae/events/articles/2006/11/24/hanging_with_gloria_...
[ 12 July 2008: Message edited by: Bitsy ]

[ 12 July 2008: Message edited by: Bitsy ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bitsy:
[b]We have to keep opening minds or we will find ourselves reliving those days.[/b]

---

Here in Canada, the Supreme Court ruled that women cannot be compelled to give their lives into the service of another person, even if that "persons" life is in danger. And thus we have no abortion laws in Canada, although currently the neo-cons are trying to back door it into law.

But if you think about it that way, that women would/could be compelled, it is sure enough slavery.