Title: Inhumanity of Abortion
Description: Gruesome details...
FacistFalangistFool - December 18, 2006 10:49 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE |
A physician testified in the San Francisco trial – where Planned Parenthood is challenging the ban – he often must separate the skull of the unborn child from its body during the abortion in order to remove the child from the woman's body.
The child's head is the most difficult part of the body to remove, said the doctor, who requested his identity not be revealed.
"Dr. Doe" told U.S. District Court Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton he often delivers all of the child’s body with the exception of the head, which remains inside the woman, and then uses scissors to cut the neck and separate the child’s head from the body.
He testified he would then use forceps to crush the head before removing it from the woman's body.
An abortion provider in the New York City trial testified an unborn child often is dismembered during the procedure and does not immediately die after limbs are pulled off.
The baby remains alive until the head is crushed, he testified in a case in which the American Civil Liberties Union and the National Abortion Federation are challenging the ban. |
| QUOTE |
Suction Abortion: Used during the first three months of pregnancy - A suction tube (27 times stronger than a home vacuum cleaner) is inserted into the womb. The powerful suction tears the baby apart limb from limb and sucks it from the womb along with the placenta. The baby's remains are deposited into an attached waste bottle.
Dilation and Curettage (D&C): Used at the end of the third month of pregnancy (approximately 12 weeks) - The cervix is dialated, ring forceps are inserted into the womb and the baby is extracted piece by piece. Then a curette (a sharp knife in a loop shape) is inserted and used to scrape away any of the baby or the placenta that remains. Profuse bleeding follows.
Dilation and Extraction (D&E): Used after 13 weeks - The cervix is dialated and the unborn child is dismembered with plier-like forceps. Force is needed to pull the baby apart. The instrument is used to seize a leg or other part of the body and then, with a twisting motion, tear it from the baby's body. The baby's spine is snapped and the skull crushed. After the baby parts are removed, they are reassembled outside the womb to be sure all are removed. Frequently baby parts are left inside the mother's womb. This can cause serious complications and sometimes death.
Help is available for women who have been injured by abortion or for the families of women who have died from abortion. You can read about tragic abortion injury cases and find out who to call for legal help by clicking: Abortion Injuries or Deaths? Call: 1-800-U-CAN-SUE.
Partial-Birth Abortion: Partial-Birth Abortions are used from the 4th month through the end of the 9th month of pregnancy. These late-term abortions are regularly used to kill healthy babies that pose no danger or threat to their mother.
For this abortion, the abortionist uses ultrasound to locate the unborn baby's legs. Forceps are then used to pull the baby's legs through the birth canal, delivering the baby feet first, except for the head. Scissors are then used to puncture the base of the back of the head. A suction device is then inserted to suction out the baby's brain so the skull will easily collapse. The dead baby is then removed |
SourceIt's disgusting isn't it? The fact that humans can contemplate murdering their own children to deny themselves the responsibilities of their actions. Sure, woman should be able to control their bodies; then they should be able to control their bodies before having intercourse. Could you imagine the uproar we'd hear if humans began aborting monkey babies? Liberals and PETA would be up in arms calling us murderers...but it's ok for us to do it to our own kind. Disgusting.
dimmick - December 18, 2006 11:23 PM (GMT)
I detest abortion, but I don't know that shock tactics are necessarily the best way to go about fighting it.
It should be enough to point out that a fertilized egg is a genetically complete human and therefore purposely killing it is murder. As far as I'm concerned, that is enough information to ban all forms of abortion in any case except a threat to the life of the mother.
Don't forget, though, that the baby is not the only victim of abortion - just as important in this equation is the woman and is the issue of unwanted pregnancy. Education on the costs of pregnancy and the promotion of abstinence first and foremost, and contraceptives second, are very important factors in reducing abortion.
FacistFalangistFool - December 18, 2006 11:27 PM (GMT)
I agree. My only issue is how people can honestly still suggest that women have the "right to choose" what to do with "their own bodies". The fertilized egg has entirely seperate DNA and therefore is no longer part of the woman's body. I'm in highschool AP Bio and know that, why can't the talking heads and politicians realize that?
And I must say, in many instances that I have experienced using these sort of tactics does actually encourage people to think differently of it, especially in cases where religion is not at all part of the person's life, and such details are the only thing that can get through to them.
Patriot76 - December 19, 2006 11:59 PM (GMT)
I agree 100% with what you have said. If, for example, two teenagers are stupid enough to have unprotected sex, murder should not be an option to make up for their "mistake." At the same time though, if abortion were illegal and they made the same mistake, do you think two teenagers who are financially and mentally incapasitated can care for the child? Would that be the best life? Either way, abortion is not an option!
FacistFalangistFool - December 20, 2006 12:20 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE |
| At the same time though, if abortion were illegal and they made the same mistake, do you think two teenagers who are financially and mentally incapasitated can care for the child? Would that be the best life? |
That is what Adoption houses are for ;).
Patriot76 - December 21, 2006 09:43 PM (GMT)
Do you think it better to have children waste away in an adoption center? That is what pisses me off now and days. When people adopt foriegn children because they are treated horribly as orphans in other countries, that is nonsense. There are certainly some places in America where children are being treated just as bad, yet people would go overseas rather than "support" their own country. Most noticably celebrities. Is this a new trend? Adopt a foriegn child, get more publicity?
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit - December 23, 2006 05:46 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE (FacistFalangistFool @ Dec 18 2006, 10:49 PM) |
"It's disgusting isn't it?"
"That is what pisses me off now and days. When people adopt foriegn children because they are treated horribly as orphans in other countries, that is nonsense. There are certainly some places in America where children are being treated just as bad, " |
I'm also 100% against abortion, seeing the difference of DNA in the mother's body, it should no longer be considered a part of her and thus a separate living being. This being said it would be murder for the mother to exact her will over the unborn baby simply because he/she cant exert their own will. I don't know how people like that can live with themselves. If people are willing to have sex then they should be willing to accept the consequences.
I totally agree with what you said before we look out to other nations to fix their problems we should focus on ours. As long as there are kids without homes in America adoption overseas should not be a necessity.