P
PRmerger
Guest
:bowdown:
- Status
T
tqualey
Guest
Hi, Guanophore,
The real trouble with this type of double-speak is that someone going in to have a cancerous tumor removed is given real informed consent, they are shown images of the tumor from various modalities, told about the recovery process, what side effects they may experience and truk load of other items. No one goes in to have a tumor removed without having everything explained in such a way that they know what they have, what will be done in surgery and about their post-op care and later recovery.
None of this takes place for an abortion. Actually, the abortionist needs to have the ultrasound for two reasons - the obvious one is to visualize the embryo and the second is to determine the price! Abortions fees are based on the gestational age. The screen is not only turned away from the mother but the sound is turned off… so she does not hear the heart beat.
If I may, I would like to share a memory of a college anatomy & physiology course I took. There was a large machine designed to register the electrical activity of the heart - as in a modified EKG. Now, what you have to imagine is that there is only this machine in the class and a tape recording of the instructor who was performing the experiment on the animal (dog in this case). Our instructor just turned on the machine and the tape recorded. Again: NO ANIMAL WAS PRESENT IN THE CLASSROOM. Well, various drugs (chemicals) were given to the anesthesized dog and we could see the effect it had on the electrical system of the heart. The last one decreased the the contraction ever so slightly - but with each beat you could see the pattern being traced out of diminishing waves until the dog’s heart just was a flat line with no electrical activity. Three of the girls in our class had begun crying and walked out before the end of the demonstration - others just sobbed in class. Really, the actually instructor called for a break for the class to recompose itself. Some never came back for the remainder of the class. And, this was about a dog who electrical waves had been recorded. This was 28 years ago and I remember it like it was yesterday.
God bless
The real trouble with this type of double-speak is that someone going in to have a cancerous tumor removed is given real informed consent, they are shown images of the tumor from various modalities, told about the recovery process, what side effects they may experience and truk load of other items. No one goes in to have a tumor removed without having everything explained in such a way that they know what they have, what will be done in surgery and about their post-op care and later recovery.
None of this takes place for an abortion. Actually, the abortionist needs to have the ultrasound for two reasons - the obvious one is to visualize the embryo and the second is to determine the price! Abortions fees are based on the gestational age. The screen is not only turned away from the mother but the sound is turned off… so she does not hear the heart beat.
If I may, I would like to share a memory of a college anatomy & physiology course I took. There was a large machine designed to register the electrical activity of the heart - as in a modified EKG. Now, what you have to imagine is that there is only this machine in the class and a tape recording of the instructor who was performing the experiment on the animal (dog in this case). Our instructor just turned on the machine and the tape recorded. Again: NO ANIMAL WAS PRESENT IN THE CLASSROOM. Well, various drugs (chemicals) were given to the anesthesized dog and we could see the effect it had on the electrical system of the heart. The last one decreased the the contraction ever so slightly - but with each beat you could see the pattern being traced out of diminishing waves until the dog’s heart just was a flat line with no electrical activity. Three of the girls in our class had begun crying and walked out before the end of the demonstration - others just sobbed in class. Really, the actually instructor called for a break for the class to recompose itself. Some never came back for the remainder of the class. And, this was about a dog who electrical waves had been recorded. This was 28 years ago and I remember it like it was yesterday.
God bless
I
ishii
Guest
Yes. Prayer, witnessing at abortion clinics, helping fund crisis pregnancy centers. All should be part of the plan of action, in addition to the politics and persuading on forums and elsewhere. A year ago or so I was praying at the Shrine of the Holy Innocents we have at our church for an end to abortion when I opened up the weekly missal randomly and saw this verse from the book of Jeremiah: “before I formed you in the womb, I knew you.” Jeremiah 1:5. I don’t believe it was a coincidence.
Ishii
G
guanophore
Guest
This is very true. I think that “cases of rape” are always brought up because in general, there is a lack of faith and trust in God that He can heal a person of the grievious trauma caused by rape, and the disgust that a woman might feel bearing the child of her abuser. It takes a lot to overcome the hatred and loathing of what was done to oneself, even without the reminder of the child.
To accept from God a child that comes from such a devilish messenger is a supreme act of faith and trust. People that use this arguement don’t have that faith and trust.
T
tqualey
Guest
Hi, Iowa Mike,
I read your post … and the way I see it, you really do appear to be judging a person’s soul. So, add me to the list, too!
God bless
I read your post … and the way I see it, you really do appear to be judging a person’s soul. So, add me to the list, too!
God bless
C
century153
Guest
And so then in that case “we” (meaning anti-pro-choice") must do what we can to have the law repealed and made unconstitutional. This is what has been discussed but unfortunately “we” must lack the stamina it took to get the law passed in the first place. I am just making an observation here – I am not sure if this is the reason we haven’t been able to have it repealed. I just know I have heard that it will “never” be repealed and that we need to dea with it in another way. This I heard from Fr. Pavone (I’m pretty sure). I apologize if I am incorrect - I’m not trying to put words in someone’s mouth. It could have been someone else.
T
tqualey
Guest
Hi, JimG,
This was truly a beautiful letter from the doctor. Thank you for sharing it with the list.
God bless
This was truly a beautiful letter from the doctor. Thank you for sharing it with the list.
God bless
C
CMatt25
Guest
No problem Guan. It seems Rence and I have been answering the same questions over and over again anyway. Rence has explained the law of the land so many times I have lost count. Just because you or others do not agree with the answers though does not mean they have not been answered. There is plenty you and others say that I don’t necessarily agree with. But it doesn’t mean you did not answer. But as I said debates like these usually end up circular. As has this one.
You would not “know” Jesus is all those things without having faith in Him though. As many non Christians worldwide Guan do not. God bless you and each of us on our journeys of faith and may His peace abide with us always.
J
JimG
Guest
Embryology is not a matter of Faith. The beginning of a new human individual is not a mystery shrouded in uncertainty.
The question before us is merely that of deciding whether or not to kill human individuals at any stage of their existence. One would think that even a pro-choice person would propose a firm cutoff point: “Let’s make it illegal to kill them after…”
The question before us is merely that of deciding whether or not to kill human individuals at any stage of their existence. One would think that even a pro-choice person would propose a firm cutoff point: “Let’s make it illegal to kill them after…”
C
CMatt25
Guest
I know this was asked of Rence. But I myself question how letting both die when one could be saved would be pro life.
R
Rence
Guest
Well, thanks, I appreciate you taking the time.
Ok, I’ll try. And I’m doing so by pouring my heart out. This is how I feel about all this. I hope I don’t insult you by doing so. So please don’t take offense…this is how I can answer your question.
Ishii, my position is pro-choice in the cases of rape and when the life of the mother is at risk. I know you don’t agree with me and I accept that. I am not trying to change anyone’s mind, and I’m not trying to say I am right and you are wrong, or anyone else for that matter. But I always hope that they have that choice. Honestly, I don’t think a woman needs to be on death’s door, floating to the light, with her blood all over the floor and running down the halls, in order to receive intervention.
I know you’re not going to agree with me and that’s totally OK. But you’re not going to convince me that a woman should be held down and forcibly made to comply with Church teaching. I’m sorry, but that’s how I feel about it. I am sharing with you how I feel. And I have no unearthly clue why you think that I am not thinking through it as well as you. I’m sure we have both thought through it, and continue to think through it.
A patient diagnosed by their doctor and prescribed a treatment, has the right to either consent to that treatment, or refuse it. If the patient refuses the treatment, end of story. If the patient consents to treatment, they should get it, as it is their right to do so. Women are their own entities. They have ownership over their own body, and they have the right to medical intervention done on their body to help them with whatever they need. It’s their choice. They have the medical consent. To try and deny medical treatment to someone because another person doesn’t agree with it is not allowed thankfully. This is not just how I feel about it, it’s that I agree with the laws that give women their right to autonomy and the right to make such decisions, and receive treatment they have consented to.
I hope you undertand where I’m coming from, because I do understand where you’re coming from.
R
Rence
Guest
Ok, I’ll try, and hopefully you won’t get upset with me for being honest. But the right to consent belongs with the woman until the unborn baby is born on the basis of the woman’s right to autonomy, and freedom to have control over her own body and be in charge of her own reproduction. It’s her choice to make.
S
silentstar
Guest
My mother, during her 7th and last pregnancy, had toxic shock as a complication of pregnancy. This involved multiple organ failure and 2 weeks in the hospital. She was lucky to survive. She had a stillbirth at 5 months and was so ill she does not know what day that happened. She had needed an abortion but refused it and when she came home she had postpartum psychosis. She accused me of murdering the baby b/c I did not do enough household chores. I was 12. She was never really the same after that and I think it was a combination of psychological trauma and maybe neurological injury from the illness.
I’m not saying this to make people feel sorry for me but rather to point out that my family was very devout and no one in our Catholic community was there for us when we needed them despite my parents’ extensive involvement in church, volunteer work, etc. and my sister and I were in Catholic school. People in the community might have thought abortion was never needed to save a woman’s life well in this one case they chose not to pay attention. I spend time here b/c I think of returning to the Church but when I see categorical statements that abortion is never needed - doctors told me differently. In the rare cases where it is needed the Catholic community for whatever reason fails to pay attention. That is what I was told by doctors in the hospital who quite frankly thought my family was a bunch of behind the times religious idiots for taking this kind of risk.
My feelings are complicated and difficult to sort out but I was told by doctors that Catholics were hypocrites on this issue. I heard really harshly judgmental things said by doctors who thought my mother had thrown her life away and potentially wrecked our family, and that my father was negligent and abusive. The result was I was angry at everyone.
I don’t mean to direct this criticism at anyone at CAF and I’m not asking for pity but my mother really should have had an abortion. Toxic shock is very rare and more associated with tampon use but that was not the problem in this case. That said the doctors by judging my family at that point made me angry b/c we needed understanding however they were correct that the Catholic community did not show concern, and I don’t know why.
I’m afraid I ended up concluding a pox on both their houses - the doctors I felt would judge and the Catholic community who did not seem to care. At this point I don’t know what to do. My mother accusing me of killing the baby has been difficult for me to forgive and I had later abuse partly b/c my parents were impaired and disconnected.
I don’t know if things have changed about Catholics and support for women who have high-risk pregnancies since then.
I’m not saying this to make people feel sorry for me but rather to point out that my family was very devout and no one in our Catholic community was there for us when we needed them despite my parents’ extensive involvement in church, volunteer work, etc. and my sister and I were in Catholic school. People in the community might have thought abortion was never needed to save a woman’s life well in this one case they chose not to pay attention. I spend time here b/c I think of returning to the Church but when I see categorical statements that abortion is never needed - doctors told me differently. In the rare cases where it is needed the Catholic community for whatever reason fails to pay attention. That is what I was told by doctors in the hospital who quite frankly thought my family was a bunch of behind the times religious idiots for taking this kind of risk.
My feelings are complicated and difficult to sort out but I was told by doctors that Catholics were hypocrites on this issue. I heard really harshly judgmental things said by doctors who thought my mother had thrown her life away and potentially wrecked our family, and that my father was negligent and abusive. The result was I was angry at everyone.
I don’t mean to direct this criticism at anyone at CAF and I’m not asking for pity but my mother really should have had an abortion. Toxic shock is very rare and more associated with tampon use but that was not the problem in this case. That said the doctors by judging my family at that point made me angry b/c we needed understanding however they were correct that the Catholic community did not show concern, and I don’t know why.
I’m afraid I ended up concluding a pox on both their houses - the doctors I felt would judge and the Catholic community who did not seem to care. At this point I don’t know what to do. My mother accusing me of killing the baby has been difficult for me to forgive and I had later abuse partly b/c my parents were impaired and disconnected.
I don’t know if things have changed about Catholics and support for women who have high-risk pregnancies since then.
T
tqualey
Guest
Hi, CMatt25,
That is the hook in this argument - “…letting both die…” while flying in face of our concept of ‘fairness’ there is NO automatic medical position that this 9 year old IS going to die - but, the fate of her unborn child has been decided.
So… unhooking this argument from the ‘both dying’ idea - if the 9 year od were to live - would you still kill her unborn child? If you are having a problem answering that … just put yourself in the position of the embryo and then see how you would answer if someone were to attack you with the tools of abortion to rip your limbs from your body and crush your head so as to remove your dead and dismembered body. This sort of puts it in context.
Oh, and by the way … there is a entire universe dealing with UNJUST laws - merely trying to cover the naked murdering of innocent with some inane Supreme Court ruling will not answer the deeper questions of conscience involved here. Seriously, when those who ‘want’ their babies plan for its birth and monitor its growth and development - while those who do not want their babies plan for its murder … and both women have ANOTHER human life inside of them. How can this be. Life is the most precious gift of all - it can not be so shamefully played with as to dispose of as trash based on whim and convenience… and claim law protects such horror. No! For while our human judges may attempt to thwart the Law of God - there is a Judgment Day for all - including these murdering judges and those they hope to hide with their cloaks.
God bless
That is the hook in this argument - “…letting both die…” while flying in face of our concept of ‘fairness’ there is NO automatic medical position that this 9 year old IS going to die - but, the fate of her unborn child has been decided.
So… unhooking this argument from the ‘both dying’ idea - if the 9 year od were to live - would you still kill her unborn child? If you are having a problem answering that … just put yourself in the position of the embryo and then see how you would answer if someone were to attack you with the tools of abortion to rip your limbs from your body and crush your head so as to remove your dead and dismembered body. This sort of puts it in context.
Oh, and by the way … there is a entire universe dealing with UNJUST laws - merely trying to cover the naked murdering of innocent with some inane Supreme Court ruling will not answer the deeper questions of conscience involved here. Seriously, when those who ‘want’ their babies plan for its birth and monitor its growth and development - while those who do not want their babies plan for its murder … and both women have ANOTHER human life inside of them. How can this be. Life is the most precious gift of all - it can not be so shamefully played with as to dispose of as trash based on whim and convenience… and claim law protects such horror. No! For while our human judges may attempt to thwart the Law of God - there is a Judgment Day for all - including these murdering judges and those they hope to hide with their cloaks.
God bless
C
catharina
Guest
**rence i appreciate the fact that you have finally admitted
your real beliefs regarding abortion. until now, you’ve stated
clearly that you ‘respect the law’ in regard to abortion.
rather, in fact, the case is that YOU support abortion
in your own choice of circumstance. it’s a heartbreak
to learn that but maybe i shouldn’t be surprised.
i’ll keep you in my prayers.**
C
catharina
Guest
very true, very accurate.
Mary_Gail_36
New member
Rence, we’ve discussed this on and off for maybe a year now.
As a nurse, how can you accept that:
There can be a disease that the only cure is for a woman to kill her child.
You seem to accept this scenario as a given…and you don’t want to possibly re-examine and say maybe that this scenario isn’t all true.
We’ve discussed the Arizona case to pieces, there is no way we can possibly know that she was going to die. We never know that for any person.
I just was speaking to a woman whose 90 year old mother in law was removed from a ventilator because the doctors believed it was the ventilator keeping her alive. They removed the ventilator and she breathed on her own.
I’ve shared my own personal story, how the doctor was convinced I was fatal. Convinced. I was no where close to death.
I’ve posted testimonies from Dr’s with forty years experience who have never had to terminate a child to save it’s mother.
But you cling to the belief that there is a case (or a few) where “choice” is neccessary.
Rence, I’m sorry I don’t mean to pick on you…but your belief system bothers me a lot because you are a Nurse and you are Catholic. If you won’t decide for life **for all cases **and go the extra mile to find a treatment that does not purposefully kill an innocent baby in the womb, really what hope is there for the medical profession at large to go the extra mile.
My own OB is pro-life/ NFP only. He’s pushing 60. When he retires will I find another one? What about my 6 year old daughter?
Father Corapi says something to the effect that Catholics should be the best morally in any field they go into.
I hope really that you are never in the scenario of being involved in an abortion. I would want you to say no. And I wish you the grace to be able to say no.
As a nurse, how can you accept that:
There can be a disease that the only cure is for a woman to kill her child.
You seem to accept this scenario as a given…and you don’t want to possibly re-examine and say maybe that this scenario isn’t all true.
We’ve discussed the Arizona case to pieces, there is no way we can possibly know that she was going to die. We never know that for any person.
I just was speaking to a woman whose 90 year old mother in law was removed from a ventilator because the doctors believed it was the ventilator keeping her alive. They removed the ventilator and she breathed on her own.
I’ve shared my own personal story, how the doctor was convinced I was fatal. Convinced. I was no where close to death.
I’ve posted testimonies from Dr’s with forty years experience who have never had to terminate a child to save it’s mother.
But you cling to the belief that there is a case (or a few) where “choice” is neccessary.
Rence, I’m sorry I don’t mean to pick on you…but your belief system bothers me a lot because you are a Nurse and you are Catholic. If you won’t decide for life **for all cases **and go the extra mile to find a treatment that does not purposefully kill an innocent baby in the womb, really what hope is there for the medical profession at large to go the extra mile.
My own OB is pro-life/ NFP only. He’s pushing 60. When he retires will I find another one? What about my 6 year old daughter?
Father Corapi says something to the effect that Catholics should be the best morally in any field they go into.
I hope really that you are never in the scenario of being involved in an abortion. I would want you to say no. And I wish you the grace to be able to say no.
T
tqualey
Guest
Hi, Rence,
I have this recurrent thought that just keeps on playing in my head … it goes like this:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are LIFE, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
No right exists if there is no right to life. The foolish 1973 decision created no right - but, condemned to death an estimated 53,000,000+ humans. This is a number truly staggering - but, it is only the tip of the iceberg for it is only the aborted life from the US. Aboriton is a world wide horror.
As you champion Roe and the mass murder it has brought - try imaging yourself in a confined space with the tools of the abortionist tearing your limbs from your body, crushing your head and removing your body parts to lay on the table to be sure they are all there before throwing them in the trash. To encourage, promote and protect such wanton destruction of life is break faith with what really make us human.
As a Registered Nurse I am sickened at how ‘informed consent’ is provided for those seeking an abortion. But, in Texas the current legislature is working on a bill that would require the abortionist to show the ultrasounographic image of the developing child to the mother and to have the volume turned on so the sound of the beating heart can be heard. These elements of seeing what is about to be destroyed are denied from the patient lest she have a change of heart and spare her child from the butcher.
God bless
I have this recurrent thought that just keeps on playing in my head … it goes like this:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are LIFE, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
No right exists if there is no right to life. The foolish 1973 decision created no right - but, condemned to death an estimated 53,000,000+ humans. This is a number truly staggering - but, it is only the tip of the iceberg for it is only the aborted life from the US. Aboriton is a world wide horror.
As you champion Roe and the mass murder it has brought - try imaging yourself in a confined space with the tools of the abortionist tearing your limbs from your body, crushing your head and removing your body parts to lay on the table to be sure they are all there before throwing them in the trash. To encourage, promote and protect such wanton destruction of life is break faith with what really make us human.
As a Registered Nurse I am sickened at how ‘informed consent’ is provided for those seeking an abortion. But, in Texas the current legislature is working on a bill that would require the abortionist to show the ultrasounographic image of the developing child to the mother and to have the volume turned on so the sound of the beating heart can be heard. These elements of seeing what is about to be destroyed are denied from the patient lest she have a change of heart and spare her child from the butcher.
God bless
C
catharina
Guest
wonderful to hear that you are an RN.
very reassuring to me - having heard rence present a very different version
of nursing over these past many months, a version that has savaged my mind.
- Status