Abortion due to gender.

[JReducation]

Brother, in all the times i have read your posts and emails, this if the first time what you have said has made me disgusted and angry

Not at you, but the idea that someone would willingly do this and have the ability to end the life ofa baby who is merely a few inches from being born disgusts me.

My prayers and my support to your community, and i pray that your community will have success in your noble ministry

Thanks for your prayers. We need them. We have been threatened by people who are not well wrapped. We need more brothers. We have to take care of these mothers and fathers and their babies.

Yes, this makes everyone who has a conscience angry. This is a child who is seconds away from entering the world. If you want to know more, there are those who believe that if the aborted child is alive, it can be killed.

In Florida, the law allows the doctor to place the live aborted child into a bucket of water and leave it to drown. I don’t know about your state.

Some people believe that this saves a mother’s life or solves one of her social problems. Nurses have reported finding these infants in buckets. One nurse saved a child once.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[JReducation]

If its brain is not capable of generating a mind, no it would not be murder. But as I said before, just because it isn’t murder doesn’t mean you can’t make the killing of a born child a crime even if it’s not a person.

It’s clear why it should be a crime in the case where the parents don’t want it killed, as for when the parents both agree to have it killed we consider whether society wants the child, and whether the child has intrinsic value.

I’m not sure what problem you want it to solve?

You said that your only interes is in women’s rights and women’s health. Now it looks like your interest is in granting someone the right to kill a person that they consider not to have intrinsic value.

Which one are you trying to achieve?

1. Are you looking to help women protect their rights and health?

or

1. Are you looking to justify abortion even though we can offer alternatives that protect a woman’s rights and health?

They are not the same pursuit.

All of us want the first.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

If you hit me on the head so hard that I go brain dead (but physically alive), then you’ve murdered me.

If you destroy the brain’s capacity to generate a mind, you should be guilty of murder. (Also, I’m not talking about fainting, because someone who faints still has a brain capable of generating a mind. I’m talking about something so severe that the person goes brain dead.)

I would want to make the distinction to more accurately reflect reality. The idea of equating embryos with adult human beings doesn’t make any sense to me.

Obviously there are difference between an embryo and an adult human being. Adults are bigger, we’ve developed more. We can show compassion to those that are smaller and weaker. (or at least should) But a human embryo is a human. Because it is a human it has the basic right to life. To me it’s really simple.

My baby son just in the past couple of days started playing peak-a-boo on his own. He puts his little hands to his face, and then opens them. Maybe that shows self awareness Maybe today he, according to flying fish, has turned into a person.

But what about a few weeks ago, when he clapped hands, or a few months ago when he said “Mammama bebebebe mamama?” Or when he looked at me and smiled, or maybe when he laughed.

Then I think about the weeks he spent in the NICU. How when he would hear my voice and give a smile, how his heartrate would stabilize when I was there. How he enjoyed me stroking his tiny foot., and the time when I stopped he stretched his little leg out in an effort to find my hand. Perhaps then, he fit flyingfish’s view of personhood.

Or one night, probably a month or so before his birth, the security alarm went off, and he reacted by kicking and moving around really quickly. That extra motion lasted for a while, until he calmed down. He was startled. Why would he get startled if he wasn’t a person? I wonder if flyingfish would consider him a person at that point.

If a baby is wanted or not is the only criteria used if a baby lives or dies. The “pro-choice” side comes up with a million and one justifications on why abortion should be allowed.

The really simple answer on why abortion is evil, is because abortion takes the life of a human being. I honestly don’t care what an embryo can or cannot do. It doesn’t need to prove it’s abilities in order to be granted life.

 

[PaulinVA]

My definition has always been tied to the mind, and whether the brain is capable of producing a mind.

My comments about 1 year olds are an “if”, if the brains of 1 year olds cannot generate minds then they are not persons.

“Brain generating a mind”? I’m sorry, that makes no sense at all to me. I’ve read your posts, and I just can’t follow your thinking.

I can’t wait until you develop your “Mind-O-Meter” that determines personhood.

 

[flyingfish]

You said that your only interes is in women’s rights and women’s health. Now it looks like your interest is in granting someone the right to kill a person that they consider not to have intrinsic value.

My main interest in caring about abortion at all is the well being of women. If babies were growing in incubators from conception, this issue wouldn’t be of much concern to me aside from an exercise in thinking.

I’m not sure what you’re saying? Sometimes women can develop complications later in pregnancy, and may need to have an abortion done to get the best chance at the best outcome. If partial birth abortion happens to be the technique that’s best for the woman’s well being, then that’s the way it should be done as far as I’m concerned. It would be up to the doctor to decide which method of abortion suits his patient best.

You can’t always offer alternatives that are just as good.

 

[JReducation]

All the points about mind, personhood, legal person, self-awareness, viability and all the fancy words that the pro-abortion movement uses are smoke screens.

None of them explain what gives us the right to deny birth to another human being at any stage of development.

The law can be used to defend the right to abortion, but the law can be very wrong. When the law says that one human being can deny another human being the fundamental right to life, the first link that chains human slaves has been forged.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[flyingfish]

But what about a few weeks ago, when he clapped hands, or a few months ago when he said “Mammama bebebebe mamama?” Or when he looked at me and smiled, or maybe when he laughed.

I have admitted that I am not an expert in the field, I don’t know very much about brain development in children. I am open to the possibility that I’m wrong.

If the human becomes conscious in the womb, then I would say from that point on only life or health of the woman would justify an abortion.

 

[flyingfish]

“Brain generating a mind”? I’m sorry, that makes no sense at all to me. I’ve read your posts, and I just can’t follow your thinking.

I can’t wait until you develop your “Mind-O-Meter” that determines personhood.

Where do you think your mind comes from? Your thinking, your memories, your emotions are all the result of brain activity. That’s all I meant.

 

[Montalo]

My main interest in caring about abortion at all is the well being of women. If babies were growing in incubators from conception, this issue wouldn’t be of much concern to me aside from an exercise in thinking.

I’m not sure what you’re saying? Sometimes women can develop complications later in pregnancy, and may need to have an abortion done to get the best chance at the best outcome. If partial birth abortion happens to be the technique that’s best for the woman’s well being, then that’s the way it should be done as far as I’m concerned. It would be up to the doctor to decide which method of abortion suits his patient best.

You can’t always offer alternatives that are just as good.

A partial birth abortion means that the baby is just a few inches away from being born

There is nothing that can defend a partial birth abortion, because it is just as easy and as harmful to remove the baby those extra inches

Also, you say you are for the rights of the women
that is a fiar point, but what about the woman inside a womb?

 

[JReducation]

My main interest in caring about abortion at all is the well being of women. If babies were growing in incubators from conception, this issue wouldn’t be of much concern to me aside from an exercise in thinking.

I’m not sure what you’re saying? Sometimes women can develop complications later in pregnancy, and may need to have an abortion done to get the best chance at the best outcome. If partial birth abortion happens to be the technique that’s best for the woman’s well being, then that’s the way it should be done as far as I’m concerned. It would be up to the doctor to decide which method of abortion suits his patient best.

You can’t always offer alternatives that are just as good.

If your concern is truly the welfare of women, join us in finding solutions that won’t do harm to the unborn. Don’t use the cop-out that we have to leave this option open for that remote possibility which happens 1 in 1,000 cases. In the meantimes thousands of unborn children are aborted per hour, just to keep an option open for one single woman who has not come around yet.

Don’t you see that the position that has been sold to you is not interested in women’s health? It does not face the fact that abortions do damage to women.

It is not interested in women’s social life. It doesn’t face the fact that almot 80% of women who have abortions suffer from psychosomatic problems that interfere with their social functioning and well-being.

It is not interested in women’s rights. It does not face the fact that this country allows men off the hook through abortion.

Don’t you see that this system that has been sold to you has more abortion clinics in Black, Hispanic and Asian communities than it has in afluent Caucasian communities? Planned Parenthood has more offices in these communities than in afluent White communities. Planned Parenthood is the largest provider of abortions in this country.

Don’t you see that those who sold you this system also lied and cheated to get these laws into effect?

They could not aquit themselves from the fact that abortion is a crime against justice. So they lied, bribed, cheated and bullied every politician and legislator that they could to find a smoke-screen.

If you really want to help women, you do not have to kill children. I can guarrantee that. My pregancy centers served over 1500 women in 2009. How many women have you served?

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[flyingfish]

A partial birth abortion means that the baby is just a few inches away from being born

There is nothing that can defend a partial birth abortion, because it is just as easy and as harmful to remove the baby those extra inches

Also, you say you are for the rights of the women
that is a fiar point, but what about the woman inside a womb?

If all it comes down to is moving the baby a few extra inches, and that places no additional stress on the woman I see your point. But I doubt this is what it is. Don’t they flood the womb with poison before this? How do they induce the baby to come out?

As I said, I don’t think the fetus inside the womb is a person, so it makes no sense for me to call it a woman.

If your concern is truly the welfare of women, join us in finding solutions that won’t do harm to the unborn.

I’m not opposed to these solutions, as long as they are the best ones for the woman. Many women who have abortions may not even want to have them, and have them because they are poor, because their husbands/boyfriends pressure them. I think the kind of outreach you’re doing is great for these women.

It’s not always the case though that a solution that doesn’t involve abortion is the best one for the woman. Take the example I linked to earlier where the woman lost nearly all her sight as a result of the pregnancy. That is one situation where abortion would have been a better solution.

Don’t you see that this system that has been sold to you has more abortion clinics in Black, Hispanic and Asian communities than it has in afluent Caucasian communities? Planned Parenthood has more offices in these communities than in afluent White communities. Planned Parenthood is the largest provider of abortions in this country.

This is not surprising to me, poor women would have a greater need for abortion than well off women.

 

[JReducation]

If all it comes down to is moving the baby a few extra inches, and that places no additional stress on the woman I see your point. But I doubt this is what it is. Don’t they flood the womb with poison before this? How do they induce the baby to come out?

They use Pitosin to induce labor and they break through the membrane a tthe cervix. The mother does the rest of the work, just like any labor.

As I said, I don’t think the fetus inside the womb is a person, so it makes no sense for me to call it a woman.

You have set up a very cozy world around what you think. Have you ever been wrong? Could you be wrong now?

I’m not opposed to these solutions, as long as they are the best ones for the woman. Many women who have abortions may not even want to have them, and have them because they are poor, because their husbands/boyfriends pressure them. I think the kind of outreach you’re doing is great for these women.

You left out the moral ones. Sometimes what we believe to be the best is not the most moral way to go and we have to accept that.

It’s not always the case though that a solution that doesn’t involve abortion is the best one for the woman. Take the example I linked to earlier where the woman lost nearly all her sight as a result of the pregnancy. That is one situation where abortion would have been a better solution.

Losing your vision is not the same as losing a life. There is no justice in taking a life to preserve someone’s vision. It’s a disproportunate situation.

This is not surprising to me, poor women would have a greater need for abortion than well off women.

Said who? Or is it this a way of getting rid of the poor?

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[flyingfish]

You have set up a very cozy world around what you think. Have you ever been wrong? Could you be wrong now?

I could be wrong.

Losing your vision is not the same as losing a life. There is no justice in taking a life to preserve someone’s vision. It’s a disproportunate situation.

This is where we differ. I don’t think the fetus has a mind, and so a person losing her vision is far worse to me than a mindless organism losing its life.

If the fetus has a mind, I still would never expect anyone to sacrifice their vision so that someone else could live. But, if the fetus has a mind, I would be in favor of restricting abortion from the point of the onset of mind only to situations where the pregnancy threatens the woman’s health or life.

Said who? Or is it this a way of getting rid of the poor?

Planned Parenthood is a business, there’s more of them in those neighborhoods because there’s more demand for abortions there.

 

[JReducation]

I could be wrong.

.

And if you are wrong, you will have supported the killing of innocent human beings. Remember, it’s not what you think. Your argument is built upon YOUR thinking that a mind is what gives someone the right to live.

But that’s your thinking. You could very well be wrong and if you are, then you are guilty of supporting killing of innocent children.

We can’t take those kinds of risks. There is too much at stake. Whereas, if you protect the life of the unborn and provide for the parents, then you lose a lot less.

I asked you a question before and you did not respond. I said that my pregnancy centers have helped 1500 women in 2009 and I asked how many you helped.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[flyingfish]

I asked you a question before and you did not respond. I said that my pregnancy centers have helped 1500 women in 2009 and I asked how many you helped.

I’m not sure what is the point of your question. I think it’s great that you’re running pregnancy centers (as long as you’re not persuading women to go blind for the sake of the unborn).

I have done some limited volunteering, mostly tutoring poor kids who can’t afford tutors. I’ve donated money that may have gone to helping women somewhere. I’m not sure what this proves, you may well be a far more charitable person than I. I never claimed to be generous or self sacrificing.

 

[JReducation]

I’m not sure what is the point of your question. I think it’s great that you’re running pregnancy centers (as long as you’re not persuading women to go blind for the sake of the unborn).

I have done some limited volunteering, mostly tutoring poor kids who can’t afford tutors. I’ve donated money that may have gone to helping women somewhere. I’m not sure what this proves, you may well be a far more charitable person than I. I never claimed to be generous or self sacrificing.

OK, my question only caused confusion. That’s probably my fault. I apologize. Let me put it another way.

My pro-life stance and that of hundreds of thousands, of others who work in this ministry is doing a lot more for the rights and health of women than the pro-choice movement. The pro-choice movement is very loud and very well spoken, but when the rubber hits the road, they have done very little for the well-being of women. These leaders do not roll up their sleeves and go out there and do something. They don’t pour millions of dollars into women’s programs, as does the pro-life movement.

The pro-choice movement has done nothing for the ilegal immigrant woman who is pregnant and cannot get medical care. The pro-life centers have offered the care without asking for her immigration status.

The pro-choice movement says that it’s ok to kill a baby who is inches away from being free of the womb or to throw a live baby into a bucket of water and drown him as a solution to a mother’s problem. The pro-life movement offers to find that baby parents and a home and to help the mother work through her problems.

That’s what I was trying to point out. I hope it’s clearer now.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[BrokenFortress]

I’m not sure what is the point of your question. I think it’s great that you’re running pregnancy centers **(as long as you’re not persuading women to go blind for the sake of the unborn). **

I have done some limited volunteering, mostly tutoring poor kids who can’t afford tutors. I’ve donated money that may have gone to helping women somewhere. I’m not sure what this proves, you may well be a far more charitable person than I. I never claimed to be generous or self sacrificing.

(emphasis mine)

You do realize that many workers for Planned Parenthood lie to their clients? That they tell the women at their centers lies about their babies to get them to have an abortion? Because you know, the more abortions they do the more money they get.

I’m not making that up. liveaction.org/

Appleton, December 9 – New undercover footage from an Appleton, WI Planned Parenthood abortion clinic shows clinic staff, including the abortion doctor, lying to two young women about fetal development and encouraging the one who is pregnant to obtain an abortion because “women die having babies.”

In the undercover video, when the two women ask a Planned Parenthood counselor if the pregnant woman’s 10-week-old unborn child has a heartbeat, the counselor emphasizes “heart tones,” and answers, “Heart beat is when the fetus is active in the uterus–can survive–which is about seventeen or eighteen weeks.” On the contrary, embryologists agree that the heartbeat begins around 3 weeks. Wisconsin informed consent law requires that women receive medically accurate information before undergoing an abortion.

The counselor then says, “A fetus is what’s in the uterus right now. That is not a baby.” Dr. Prohaska, the abortion doctor, insists, “It’s not a baby at this stage or anything like that.” Prohaska also states that having an abortion will be “much safer than having a baby,” warning, “You know, women die having babies.”

The video comes one month after the widely reported resignation of Planned Parenthood clinic director Abby Johnson. Johnson left her leadership position at Planned Parenthood in Bryan, TX after watching a 13-week old fetus being aborted in her clinic on ultrasound. She said during a recent interview, “Planned Parenthood really tries to instill in their employees and the women that are coming in for abortions that this is not a baby.” In another interview, she noted, “They don’t want to talk about when your baby has a heartbeat,” because “they don’t want to give the woman information that could give her a connection with her baby.”

The investigation is organized by Live Action, a nonprofit student group. Lila Rose, the 21-year-old UCLA student and Live Action president, says medical lies and manipulative counseling are routine at Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion chain.

“They will do or say anything in order to sell more abortions to more women, whether it is covering up sexual abuse or lying to women about medical facts,” says Rose. “Our team has visited dozens of Planned Parenthood clinics undercover. Planned Parenthood, while claiming to support patient self-determination, operates with an ‘abortion-first mentality.’”

The video is the first in Live Action’s “Rosa Acuna Project,” a multi-state undercover audit documenting Planned Parenthood’s abortion counseling. Planned Parenthood has come under fire recently after Live Action’s investigations found them willing to conceal sexual abuse and accept donations targeted to abort African-Americans only. Videos of abuse cover-up prompted state investigations of Planned Parenthood and diversion of the abortion giant’s public subsidies.

“Planned Parenthood is a billion-dollar organization with nearly $350 million of government funding, and stands to gain hundreds of millions more from national health care,” says Rose. “Do we really want to subsidize an organization that gives women in need atrocious misinformation and predatory abortion practices?”

 

[BrokenFortress]

And another point… I saw this news article and it reminded me of this thread and the idea of personhood.

news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8497148.stm

That just goes to show that you can’t assume that those in vegetative states are not people. You cannot know for sure what they can and cannot do. So if you think that some people are not self-aware, they may in fact be.

 

[JReducation]

(emphasis mine)

You do realize that many workers for Planned Parenthood lie to their clients? That they tell the women at their centers lies about their babies to get them to have an abortion? Because you know, the more abortions they do the more money they get.

I’m not making that up. liveaction.org/

Planned Parenthood targets the poor. It’s not true that there is a greater demand. Planned Parenthood knows that the poor are in crisis. But they don’t provide support to help these parents out of the crisis. They market abortion. This way they make money and they eliminate another poor person. It’s a great deal for them. How they can live with their conscience is beyond me.

I have never told a mother that she has to go blind for the sake of her unborn. I have told her the truth. Man does not have the authority to deny another human being the right to be born. Therefore, we will have to deal with the situation as best we can and settle for the best results that we can get. However, no one is obliged to accept our services. We simply do not provide abortion nor point people to abortion centers.

If you walk in our door, we will provide for you and your baby, even your partner, if you have one. If that’s not what you want, then we can’t help you. But we do not tell them the lies that abortion clinics tell them, beginning with “it’s just a blob”.

We tell people the truth. It has everything that is needed to become just like you. All it needs is a safe place to grow. You are his or her mother and father. We use his and her, because the fertilized egg has chromosomes. Therefore it has gender.

It’s interesting how we permit certain things to be done to human beings that we do not allow to happen to our pets. I have yet to meet a pet owner taking their dog in for an abortion.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[JReducation]

And another point… I saw this news article and it reminded me of this thread and the idea of personhood.

news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8497148.stm

That just goes to show that you can’t assume that those in vegetative states are not people. You cannot know for sure what they can and cannot do. So if you think that some people are not self-aware, they may in fact be.

The moral rule is that when you know that you could be wrong, you alway err on the side of life. You can help someone with their problems, but you can’t bring back the person you killed.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF