NY Times Magazine: The New Abortion Providers

[fkjuliano]

The enemies of God (to borrow a phrase from the Muslims) are very concerned because the number of abortion mills has been falling steadily for years, and those bent on infanticide should never be inconvenienced with a longer trip or with any kind of wait. Goodness, they could even change their minds about the live dismemberment/scalding of their unborn children, and they can’t have that! That is why they have launched a campaign to make abortion mainstream, to get more doctors to become abortionists and more hospitals to offer in utero infant slaughter. Their goal is for a woman to be able to get a physical, a mammogram and an abortion, all from the same doctor, with no inconvenience and without a second thought.

Seriously now, at the Nuremberg trials a precedent was established that those who commit monstrous crimes under the cover of law are fully responsible for their actions when the law itself is patently criminal. Thus, the abortionists and all their enablers, God willing, will one day answer for their crimes in a human court before facing Jesus Christ in His heavenly throne. Any claim that they were not breaking secular law will be given no consideration whatsoever.

 

[Elizabeth502]

Where’s the link to the “NY Times Magazine” article of thread title?

I have no idea what you’re talking about. There’s absolutely no context to your post.

 

[BVM_1221]

Seriously now, at the Nuremberg trials a precedent was established that those who commit monstrous crimes under the cover of law are fully responsible for their actions when the law itself is patently criminal. .

Hoo hah, here comes the Nazis again! Nuremberg trials and all that. Amazing how anti-abortion types feel the need to drag in this sort of irrelevent arguement.:tsktsk::tsktsk::tsktsk:

Reality cheque. In most of the developed world, abortion is legal, pure and simple. You may not like this, but it does mean one thing that you have overlooked.

What court would you plan to have the proposed trials in, and where are you going to find the Judges and Jurors?

 

[fkjuliano]

Where’s the link to the “NY Times Magazine” article of thread title?

I have no idea what you’re talking about. There’s absolutely no context to your post.

You’re right, of course.

Here’s the link:

nytimes.com/2010/07/18/magazine/18abortion-t.html?src=me&ref=general

 

[estesbob]

Hoo hah, here comes the Nazis again! Nuremberg trials and all that. Amazing how anti-abortion types feel the need to drag in this sort of irrelevent arguement.:tsktsk::tsktsk::tsktsk:

Reality cheque. In most of the developed world, abortion is legal, pure and simple. You may not like this, but it does mean one thing that you have overlooked.

What court would you plan to have the proposed trials in, and where are you going to find the Judges and Jurors?

Well if its legal it must be OK. …

 

[fkjuliano]

Hoo hah, here comes the Nazis again! Nuremberg trials and all that. Amazing how anti-abortion types feel the need to drag in this sort of irrelevent arguement.:tsktsk::tsktsk::tsktsk:

Reality cheque. In most of the developed world, abortion is legal, pure and simple. You may not like this, but it does mean one thing that you have overlooked.

What court would you plan to have the proposed trials in, and where are you going to find the Judges and Jurors?

Reality check: it doesn’t matter if corrupt judges and legislators call abortion legal. In fact, those would be the very first ones to be tried, and they can call abortion Beethoven’s Tenth Symphony for all I care. It’s still murder. This is the whole point of my argument.

As to the details of the actual tribunal, we’ll figure it out in due time. Assuming God Almighty does not decide to punish the abortionists in a more direct way, it will not be minor logistical difficulties that will save them from justice. As in Nuremberg, I foresee three-judge panels, which would be composed of whatever decent judges are currently on the bench supplemented by additional Christian lawyers. If necessary, one of the members of the panel could be an educated non-lawyer. Trust me, we could have a national trial for crimes against God and humanity running in three months maximum, prison cells and gallows included. Again, if the Allies did it amidst the ruins of Nazi Germany while bickering among themselves, we could do it as well. With God all things are possible, and this isn’t particularly hard.

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

From the article:

By taking jobs on university faculties, the young doctors avoid walking to work through a scrum of screaming demonstrators. “Some people like to live on the edge — I don’t,” said Emily Godfrey, a 40-year-old doctor who practices at a primary-care clinic at the University of Illinois at Chicago, where she also does abortions. “I’m a Catholic girl from the suburbs. I’m a yoga student. I like calm and serenity.”

I know side walk counselors…they don’t scream…and I wonder why it was neccessary to mention being a Catholic?

Also:

Instead of a sterile and expensive hospital operating room, patients could go to a low-cost clinic with pastel walls and sympathetic staff members. At a Planned Parenthood I visited recently in Rochester, while women were having abortions, they could look at photos of a Caribbean beach, taped above them on the ceiling

.

 

[BVM_1221]

Well if its legal it must be OK. …

Now now, don’t put words into my mouth that I never said, or even implied. Bad manners:tsktsk:

 

[JimG]

The pro-abortion community wants more abortionists, and wants them to provide abortions in their offices and in hospitals, rather than in abortion clinics. The push is to make abortion training a standard and required part of OB-GYN training. Abortion may well up as a required part of a “standard of care” under healthcare regulations.

But sometimes little incidents like this one, recounted in the article, bring the truth uncomfortably close:

“Two years ago, a young professor at the University of Michigan named Lisa Harris wrote an academic article about performing an 18-week abortion while she was 18 weeks pregnant. Harris described grasping the fetus’s leg with her forceps, feeling a kick in her own uterus and starting to cry. “It was an overwhelming feeling — a brutally visceral response — heartfelt and unmediated by my training or my feminist pro-choice politics,” she wrote. “It was one of the more raw moments in my life.””

 

[BVM_1221]

Reality check: it doesn’t matter if corrupt judges and legislators call abortion legal. In fact, those would be the very first ones to be tried, and they can call abortion Beethoven’s Tenth Symphony for all I care. It’s still murder. This is the whole point of my argument.

As to the details of the actual tribunal, we’ll figure it out in due time. Assuming God Almighty does not decide to punish the abortionists in a more direct way, it will not be minor logistical difficulties that will save them from justice. As in Nuremberg, I foresee three-judge panels, which would be composed of whatever decent judges are currently on the bench supplemented by additional Christian lawyers. If necessary, one of the members of the panel could be an educated non-lawyer. Trust me, we could have a national trial for crimes against God and humanity running in three months maximum, prison cells and gallows included. Again, if the Allies did it amidst the ruins of Nazi Germany while bickering among themselves, we could do it as well. With God all things are possible, and this isn’t particularly hard.

Hmmm…well, the first step would be to have a President and Congress willing to set up this sort of thing.

" As in Nuremberg, I foresee three-judge panels, which would be composed of whatever decent judges are currently on the bench supplemented by additional Christian lawyers"

This would lead to accusations of Kangaroo Court proceedings.

Oh, and you may have to amend the Constitution to eliminate that ex post facto provision. Abortion is currently legal. One would need to pass a law descriibing it as a crime against humanity, or whatever, and apply it ex post facto to actions done when abortions were legal.:dts:

So, what should be our FIRST step or action to put this into practice.

Your best shot is a Constitutional Amendment. In two sections. Section 1 to prohibit abortion, and section 2 to remove ex post facto. No problem. 2/3 House, 2/3 Senate, 3/4 States. A snap

 

[Mark77]

Hoo hah, here comes the Nazis again! Nuremberg trials and all that. Amazing how anti-abortion types feel the need to drag in this sort of irrelevent arguement.:tsktsk::tsktsk::tsktsk:

Reality cheque. In most of the developed world, abortion is legal, pure and simple. You may not like this, but it does mean one thing that you have overlooked.

What court would you plan to have the proposed trials in, and where are you going to find the Judges and Jurors?

**i will only submit to the court presided over by the one just Judge, Jesus the Christ, our Lord & Savior!

“And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me.’” (Mt 25:40)

Those who ignore the mass murder of abortion, 50 MILLION INNOCENT BABIES MURDERED in the US since Roe v. Wade 1972, are like the Germans who helped the Nazis, the Russians who watched millions murdered under Stalin, the Chinese who allow female babies to be murdered today in their “day care” centers today…
**
Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, Ora Pro Nobis Peccatoribus!

mark

 

[vera_dicere]

I read an article a few years back written by a young woman who then headed the “Medical Students for choice [sic]”.

I felt sorry for them, that they want to go into a profession where they slaughter countless unborn children in abortions, despite being part of the generation that for the first nine months of their lives they could be ripped limb from limb as they were not “persons” according to teh law. I have serious concerns for the mental health and emotional stability of people who want to dedicate their lives to the killing of unborn children.

Its obviously a real problem for the pro-aborts that those who do the dirty work are aging and dying naturally or retiring, its why RU-486 is being pushed more and more - because its easier to despense for a “doctor” and they don’t have to deal with the little arms and legs and faces of their victims.

I’d say its a problem across all Western abortion legal countries.

I for one hope no one replaces these gosh darn murderers. Because, let’s face facts, that’s what they are, murderers. May God soften their hearts and turn them from that path.

 

[fkjuliano]

Hmmm…well, the first step would be to have a President and Congress willing to set up this sort of thing.

" As in Nuremberg, I foresee three-judge panels, which would be composed of whatever decent judges are currently on the bench supplemented by additional Christian lawyers"

This would lead to accusations of Kangaroo Court proceedings.

Oh, and you may have to amend the Constitution to eliminate that ex post facto provision. Abortion is currently legal. One would need to pass a law descriibing it as a crime against humanity, or whatever, and apply it ex post facto to actions done when abortions were legal.:dts:

So, what should be our FIRST step or action to put this into practice.

Your best shot is a Constitutional Amendment. In two sections. Section 1 to prohibit abortion, and section 2 to remove ex post facto. No problem. 2/3 House, 2/3 Senate, 3/4 States. A snap

I make no pretense that what I propose would be done under the current constitutional framework. The present system is what has allowed the disgraceful state of affairs we see today. Therefore, it should be scrapped. As Thomas Jefferson said, “Every generation needs a new revolution.” That may be hyperbole, but I think the US is now overdue. In fact, I believe revolutionary change is now inevitable because the system does not allow meaningful changes by ordinary means, and when it does happen, at least for a while, all the legal niceties you mentioned will become immaterial. The only question is if the change will take us towards a true Christian (that is to say, Catholic) society. I pray that with God’s help it will be.

 

[estesbob]

I read an article a few years back written by a young woman who then headed the “Medical Students for choice [sic]”.

I felt sorry for them, that they want to go into a profession where they slaughter countless unborn children in abortions, despite being part of the generation that for the first nine months of their lives they could be ripped limb from limb as they were not “persons” according to teh law. I have serious concerns for the mental health and emotional stability of people who want to dedicate their lives to the killing of unborn children.

Its obviously a real problem for the pro-aborts that those who do the dirty work are aging and dying naturally or retiring, its why RU-486 is being pushed more and more - because its easier to despense for a “doctor” and they don’t have to deal with the little arms and legs and faces of their victims.

I’d say its a problem across all Western abortion legal countries.

I for one hope no one replaces these gosh darn murderers. Because, let’s face facts, that’s what they are, murderers. May God soften their hearts and turn them from that path.

I wonderr how any woman would trust an obstetrcian who also performed abortions?

 

[BVM_1221]

I make no pretense that what I propose would be done under the current constitutional framework. The present system is what has allowed the disgraceful state of affairs we see today. Therefore, it should be scrapped. As Thomas Jefferson said, “Every generation needs a new revolution.” That may be hyperbole, but I think the US is now overdue. In fact, I believe revolutionary change is now inevitable because the system does not allow meaningful changes by ordinary means, and when it does happen, at least for a while, all the legal niceties you mentioned will become immaterial. The only question is if the change will take us towards a true Christian (that is to say, Catholic) society. I pray that with God’s help it will be.

Ah…a theocracy of the minority, imposed by force on the majority.

 

[estesbob]

Ah…a theocracy of the minority, imposed by force on the majority.

Which is exactly how abortion on dermand was opposed on this country.

 

[BVM_1221]

i will only submit to the court presided over by the one just Judge, Jesus the Christ, our Lord & Savior!

“And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me.’” (Mt 25:40)

Those who ignore the mass murder of abortion, 50 MILLION INNOCENT BABIES MURDERED in the US since Roe v. Wade 1972, are like the Germans who helped the Nazis, the Russians who watched millions murdered under Stalin, the Chinese who allow female babies to be murdered today in their “day care” centers today…

Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, Ora Pro Nobis Peccatoribus!

mark

Many Germans who “helped” the Nazis did so under fear…fear of death. It was not a good idea to oppose the Nazis when you lived under their life-and-death power. Same for the millions of Russians, and millions of Chinese. Have compassion on them. They lived, and to some extent still do, under opprasive governments. :sad_yes:

In contrast, we can openly publish about our opposition to abortion. This forum, for example.

 

[fkjuliano]

Many Germans who “helped” the Nazis did so under fear…fear of death. It was not a good idea to oppose the Nazis when you lived under their life-and-death power. Same for the millions of Russians, and millions of Chinese. Have compassion on them. They lived, and to some extent still do, under opprasive governments. :sad_yes:

In contrast, we can openly publish about our opposition to abortion. This forum, for example.

But it was a good idea to oppose the Nazis. It might have cost one’s life, but that was better than losing one’s eternal soul. Besides, if enough people had openly opposed the Nazis, of course there would have been no Third Reich. Would I personally have had the courage to say no? Quite possibly not, but it would have been the right thing to do.

If modern day governments are not as repressive as Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia, that is all the more reason why anyone who is not actively opposed to abortion is morally guilty to a greater extent than ordinary Germans and Russians during their time under totalitarianism.

 

[estesbob]

Many Germans who “helped” the Nazis did so under fear…fear of death. It was not a good idea to oppose the Nazis when you lived under their life-and-death power. Same for the millions of Russians, and millions of Chinese. Have compassion on them. They lived, and to some extent still do, under opprasive governments. :sad_yes:

In contrast, we can openly publish about our opposition to abortion. This forum, for example.

So what excuse do those Cathloics who purport to be pro-life yet support abortion with their vote have. To hear many of them talk you think that had they been at Nuremberg they would have demanded those who ran the gas chambers be punished but that those who hired them to do so.

 

[Manny_DeStefano]

The abortion business has suceeded in de-humanizing in utero babies. That is the necessary first step to the acceptance of killing babies. Our mission is to put the humanity back into the fetus. It is very important to re-teach modern America the lessons that our ancient relatoves knew so very well, that God’s blessing is a baby from the moment of conception. We do this by humanizing babies. Look at the furor that the brief Tim Tebough clip made during the Super Bowl. They had the audacity to place a human face upon what was supposed to be an aborted “tissue mass”.
Out Respect Life Committee is planning to enlist an expectant mother who will share her modern sonogram of her growing baby, so that we can welcome our future parishioner from the photo - sonograms today are very clear and definitly show the details of the very tiny baby, unlike the pictures that I saw of my own children twenty years ago that were blurs on a screen. Linking the in utero sonogram to the eventual baptism of the new parishioner makes the human connection between that tiny growing baby and humanity. It is a powereful tool against abortion.
As a lawyer, I recognize that overturninbg Roe v Wade is unlikly, at least until popular sentemant is re-directed to comprehend what the abortionists do not want us to understand - thatat conception, a human baby is formed. We may never change the law, but we can change hearts, and make abortion an unacceptable alternative.