You aren't giving me data, you're giving me what you want to believe. The only truthful thing in your statement might be that only 1% of abortions are late-term...20 weeks and beyond. NOW according to an ACTUAL study....of 292 women who had late-term abortions...all of them were for the same reason as those who terminated during the early months. In other words...choice zealots keep saying something false hoping it sticks into the public dialogue. But something "assumed" from no basis does not make it truthful. - - - Updated - - - That is data? Something written on an abortionist website? Is everything on the internet true?
There are women like that, yes. If she was sooo responsible, how is it exactly she got pregnant in the first place ??
It's not really about the risk, because if it was the woman would have gotten her tubes tied. No, the fact is these women WANT to have a baby at some point in the future, and are more than willing to take on the negligible risk then. Do you think she should only have to take on the risk if she gets to keep the baby at a point in her life when she wants one? What about women who will go on to have 2 or 3 children later? Is 1 pregnancy really that big of a deal when we put it in that perspective? Is it really that surprising? I mean choicers are in favor of choice—ANY choice that the woman wants to choose... Many of these reasons aren't exactly "noble". I remember there was an article about a 17-year-old who got an abortion because she couldn't fit into her prom dress, she was quite a ways into her pregnancy too, I'll go see if I can try to find the article...
Women every day go to illegal abortion clinics in third world countries KNOWING they risk life and limb. (yes and limb - ir you have ever seen the quadruple amputees that have survived severe sepsis the risk definitely is life and limb) The question that should be asked is - what is so frightening about the alternative that an illegal abortion looks like the BETTER option? - - - Updated - - - And why are not the partners of these women having vasectomies? What? Is ALL the woman's fault - she impregnates herself and then seeks and abortion?
"""NOW according to an ACTUAL study....of 292 women who had late-term abortions...all of them were for the same reason as those who terminated during the early months. In other words...choice zealots keep saying something false""" WHAT are we saying that is false? ...""" hoping it sticks into the public dialogue. But something "assumed" from no basis does not make it truthful."""" WHAT is your POINT?
And there are men preying on women - assuring them they have had vasectomies or that they will continue with the partnership or And many of these men are the real reason for the abortion rate
And you are still moving goal posts - using data from mid term abortions and applying it to late term abortions Where is the logic? Even your own links stated that later term abortions are three times the price of earlier abortions. Why would someone wait just so they could pay more money and have a higher risk?? On the other hand if an early ultrasound showed severe foetal abnormality the woman may want to terminate the pregnancy rather than go through months of having to tell everyone that the baby she is carrying is doomed to die
I think we might have to give up on asking this poster inconvenient questions.......seems he doesn't have a point either (or I'm missing it)..........it's hard to tell when he doesn't know that HE doesn't determine what "late term" is...
I have given you data which you don't want to believe. "Religious Tolerance" is an "abortionist website"? Please check it out, Religious Tolerance presents both sides of an issue. Why are you so desperate to believe the worst of women? Women who have late-term abortions have good reasons for them. That is the essential fact.
What purpose would there be in putting it there if it's not true? You have not provided any proof of women aborting after viability without a medical reason or fetal deformity.
YOU made the claim that you know of so many women who had horrible physical affects from abortion. Do try to keep up, k?
Grannie, CKW is just projecting what they want to believe, the fact remains that no data can say what reasons abortions after 24 weeks were carried out for, all of the data only deals with abortions after 21 weeks and as I have already pointed out the majority of abortions in that time frame fall between 21 and 23 weeks, so it stands to logical reason that any reasons given will reflect the abortions carried out between 21 and 23 weeks. In the UK only 0.068% of all abortions take place after 23 weeks & 6 days (136 out of 200,000), IF the US follows the same or similar percentages then out of the 1.1 million abortions performed on average in the USA only 816 are performed on or after 24 weeks. Even as a percentage of "late-term" abortions (after 21 weeks) it is only 5.2% of the 15,399 abortions after 21 weeks. The reasons for every one of those abortions after 24 weeks could be for medical reasons and it would not appear in the top five reasons for abortions on or after 21 weeks. What CKW is trying to do is to project a false correlation based on data they do not have.
good to see you follow the usual pattern of just following the crowd like a sheep, perhaps you should do your own research before sucking up to the propaganda boys, if you did then you might actually educate yourself in something once in a while.
The vast majority of late term abortions ARE for purely elective reasons and PBA, as stated by the AMA, is never indicated to save the life of the mother and in fact is more a danger. http://www.justfactsdaily.com/most-late-term-abortions-are-not-for-medical-reasons/ "It is only in extremely rare cases that abortion can even be mentioned as a potential means of saving the mother's life. Former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop, stated in a 1996 New York Times editorial that "partial-birth abortions are not needed to save the life of the mother."1 Sixteen years earlier, he wrote: "In my thirty-six years in pediatric surgery I have never known of one instance where the child had to be be aborted to save the mother's life."2 Even Planned Parenthood's Dr. Alan Guttmacher acknowledged, Today it is possible for almost any patient to be brought through pregnancy alive, unless she suffers from a fatal illness such as cancer or leukemia, and, if so, abortion would be unlikely to prolong, much less save, life.3" http://www.abort73.com/end_abortion/is_abortion_ever_justified/ "Dr. Nancy Romer, FACOG, Chairman of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Miami Valley Hospital in Ohio said, "People deserve to know that the partial-birth abortion is never medically indicated either to save the health of a woman or preserve her future fertility." Dr. Martin Haskell, an abortionist who specializes in these late-term abortions, has admitted to performing over 1,000 of these abortions. He stated in a recorded interview with the American Medical News (the official newspaper of the AMA) that: "In my particular case, probably 20% (of these procedures) are for genetic reasons. And the other 80% are purely elective." That means in 80% (that's over 800 babies) there was no health risk for the mother and the baby had no handicaps." http://www.prolife.com/abormeth.html
No they are in favor of abortion but have to hide behind monikers rather than admit their positions or what it involves, the killing of a baby.
And they want to conveniently redefine the word "baby" to not include human life when it is inside the womb.
Exactly........... But...... ba·by (bābē Share: n. pl. ba·bies 1. a. A very young child; an infant. b. An unborn child; a fetus. https://ahdictionary.com/word/search.html?q=baby&submit.x=49&submit.y=21 and you might want to save these for future use when they engage in their specious nonsense Taking Care of You and Your Baby While You're Pregnant http://familydoctor.org/familydoctor...-pregnant.html How about the government? What is prenatal care? Prenatal care is the health care you get while you are pregnant. Take care of yourself and your baby by: Getting early prenatal care. If you know you're pregnant, or think you might be, call your doctor to schedule a visit. Getting regular prenatal care. Your doctor will schedule you for many checkups over the course of your pregnancy. Don't miss any — they are all important. Following your doctor's advice. http://www.womenshealth.gov/publicat...atal-care.html How about During Pregnancy When you drink alcohol, so does your unborn baby. there is a lot you can do to keep yourself healthy and not give HIV to your baby. Some workplace hazards can affect the health of your unborn baby. http://www.cdc.gov/pregnancy/during.html
No, Anti-Choicers want to redefine "fetus" and call it something it isn't out of dishonesty. Their fear of facts and science and law is palpable.... - - - Updated - - - Ignorance of the difference between "common usage" and exact terminology in law and science is no excuse to take away the rights of women.
Don't give up your day job, your psychic powers are lacking. - - - Updated - - - If they want to call it a baybee, I let them. It doesn't change my stance on abortion.
Baby is the correct term as used even by the government and by the many health clinics and physician associations I have cited. I don't need to go any higher to so I am accurately using the term as even the GOVERNMENT says, as the MEDICAL COMMUNITY says. YOU have not provided a scintilla of rebuttal other than "because I say so".
Doesn't take a physic else explain what they have against abortion. Oh I wasn't trying, believe me, but just admit what happens in an abortion and who is killed, a baby. Then you can relish in your position that nothing can stop a woman from killing her baby if that is her CHOICE. Heck I bet you will even claim a higher moral standing and all that too.
Fine , call it anything you want ....it's still legal to abort it. When it comes to science and facts and law , it's a fetus.... IF it's a "baby" that insinuates it's a person so the woman it's in has every right to get rid of it....NO person has a right to use another person's body to sustain life. Now prove it's NOT a fetus .....
No reason why she can't. So you favor eugenics? Unless you're talking about terminal conditions which will result in a stillborn child or one which dies immediately after delivery - but if you're comfortable with late-term aborting a child just for being born with dwarfism then that's not much different than the ideology of the NSDAP That's understandable
