Vogue Magazine Under Fire for Promoting Partial-Birth Abortions

  • Thread starter Thread starter sertelt
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I really have to believe that this woman, like so many others, have truly no idea what exactly and explicitly occurs in a partial-birth abortive procedure.
Most of the public has been spared the details unfortunately, even though pro-lifers were pretty successful in winning the battle of language by terming the procedure appropriately.
 
Jennifer123 said:
Most of the public has been spared the details unfortunately, even though pro-lifers were pretty successful in winning the battle of language by terming the procedure appropriately.
Click to expand...
Terming it what? Murder?
 
Alexius said:
Terming it what? Murder?
Click to expand...
The secular culture is adept at manipulating scientific terms and language in order to confuse people about moral issues. They object, not surprisingly, to the term, saying it’s judgemental and innaccurate. We of course know differently, but unfortunately the culture of death is successful more often than not in winning the battle of language in these instances. Except this time.
 
Jennifer123 said:
The secular culture is adept at manipulating scientific terms and language in order to confuse people about moral issues. They object, not surprisingly, to the term, saying it’s judgemental and innaccurate. We of course know differently, but unfortunately the culture of death is successful more often than not in winning the battle of language in these instances. Except this time.
Click to expand...
Like using the term “fetus” to de-humanize the child? Of course, the term is old, but its implications and purpose have changed…
 
Alexius said:
Like using the term “fetus” to de-humanize the child? Of course, the term is old, but its implications and purpose have changed…
Click to expand...
Well, sure. 👍 Although that is a factual scientific term, a lot of times the pro-choicers will use fetus to avoid having to say baby, or child, or person.

Another example is the term “fertilized egg”. Now there really is no such thing as a fertilized egg, an egg can be fertilized, but at the time of fertilization the egg ceases to exist and the united sperm and egg are then known as the embryo, a fully formed human individual. But “fertilized egg” is again another attempt at dehumanization and confusion since the implications of killing a “fertilized egg” is seen as less than that of killing an embryo.

The greatest example relevant right now is “stem cell research”. Catholics and pro-lifers don’t point-blank reject “stem cell research” but we do object to embryonic stem cell research. However, I have yet to see any MSM story detailing the difference between embryonic stem-cell research and adult stem-cell research.
 
Jennifer123 said:
Well, sure. 👍 Although that is a factual scientific term, a lot of times the pro-choicers will use fetus to avoid having to say baby, or child, or person.

Another example is the term “fertilized egg”. Now there really is no such thing as a fertilized egg, an egg can be fertilized, but at the time of fertilization the egg ceases to exist and the united sperm and egg are then known as the embryo, a fully formed human individual. But “fertilized egg” is again another attempt at dehumanization and confusion since the implications of killing a “fertilized egg” is seen as less than that of killing an embryo.

The greatest example relevant right now is “stem cell research”. Catholics and pro-lifers don’t point-blank reject “stem cell research” but we do object to embryonic stem cell research. However, I have yet to see any MSM story detailing the difference between embryonic stem-cell research and adult stem-cell research.
Click to expand...
I agree with everything you stated. The only thing I have heard about embryonic stem cells and their distinction is that they have not yet fully formed, so they may conform easier to a patient’s body. I’m not sure that is true or relevant, but I have heard this…I don’t know much about this topic, so I can’t say for sure.

Prayers and Petitions,
Alexius :cool:
 
Alexius said:
I agree with everything you stated. The only thing I have heard about embryonic stem cells and their distinction is that they have not yet fully formed, so they may conform easier to a patient’s body. I’m not sure that is true or relevant, but I have heard this…I don’t know much about this topic, so I can’t say for sure.

Prayers and Petitions,
Alexius :cool:
Click to expand...
It is theoretical and has never been proven. Adult stem-cells have been used in therapies for some time now. If you have time or interest, there should be threads here at CAF about ESCR which would have lots of useful information.
 
The article states that Campbell’'s water broke at 22 weeks but the drs told her that her baby would not survive. I thought that there were premature infants who lived at this young an age. :confused:

What Campbell says here frustrates me greatly.

"I chose what I believe was the path of least suffering, for myself, my husband, our future children, and mostly for the baby inside me," she says.

Yeah, killing your baby is helpful to the child.:nope:

The below statement from her, I think, show selfishness. What else would she have the procedure called? Either way, she is very concerned with how she feels personally. That is troubling.

"How can I agree to a partial-birth abortion and not feel like a bad person? Yep, that’s a tough one. It preys on women in a weakened state - women who already likely believe they are ‘bad’ because they have failed as mothers," Campbell adds.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top