Court Forces Woman to Abort

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
61

[quote]Cortes wrote:
Sifu did you even read the article you linked? I did. Here are a couple of excerpts. Emphasis mine:

[quote]
Still, the researchers note, the actual frequency of specific birth defects were relatively small, all ranging below one percent. That compares to an overall rate of all birth defects of about 2 percent in the general population.

Since last summer, U.S. guidelines have recommended against using Depakote in pregnancy, but Meador said it was still widely used across the country.

Although a few women with epilepsy may only respond to Depakote, often there are alternatives. “If a drug doesn’t work on a woman, you can try another,” said Meador.[/quote]

Better cut that useless piece of meat out of her. Its existence will certainly be meaningless. [/quote]

To highlight what Cortes highlighted.

62

The number of babies that are aborted because of birth defects is tiny. Abortion is the new birth control. “Preganant? Oops…time to have an abortion.”

It’s sick, really sick. In fact no one here will actually know how sick until there is a time when you look back and say (as we do with slavery) how in the world did we let that happen?

63

[quote]Cortes wrote:
Sifu did you even read the article you linked? I did. Here are a couple of excerpts. Emphasis mine:

[quote]
Still, the researchers note, the actual frequency of specific birth defects were relatively small, all ranging below one percent. That compares to an overall rate of all birth defects of about 2 percent in the general population.

Since last summer, U.S. guidelines have recommended against using Depakote in pregnancy, but Meador said it was still widely used across the country.

Although a few women with epilepsy may only respond to Depakote, often there are alternatives. “If a drug doesn’t work on a woman, you can try another,” said Meador.[/quote]

Better cut that useless piece of meat out of her. Its existence will certainly be meaningless. [/quote]

I read that. As I wrote depakote is one of the drugs they use it is not the only drug that is used. I get the distinct impression you are not grasping a very important concept regarding the medications used to prevent epileptic seizures. They do use just one drug and call it a day.

They use what is sometimes referred to as a “stack” of drugs. A stack of drugs is a combination of multiple drugs that are used simultaneously, at the same time. The benefit of a stack is it increases the chances of the desired results being achieved. The downside is toxicity issues are multiplied and if two or more drugs have the same toxicity issue the odds of there being a problem are increased.

So just because the chances of depakote causing a specific birth defects is below one percent when used alone that doesn’t mean the odds of a defect remain the same if it is stacked with another toxic drug or combination of toxic drugs. What I do know is that these kinds of odds aren’t additive they multiply.

So if the incidence of Spina Bifida is increased twelves times by depakote if any of the other drugs in the stack increase the likelihood it is going to be a multiple of twelve. I don’t know if there are any figures for what the chances are when it is stacked with other but I do know that no reputable researcher would knowingly engage in such a test

"The odds of spina bifida, for instance, were more than 12 times higher in these babies compared to those whose mothers didn’t take epilepsy drugs. Abnormal skull development, cleft palate, holes in the heart’s walls, extra fingers or toes, smaller limbs, and urinary problems were also more frequent in the Depakote group, with odds increased up to seven times.

And five of these defects appeared to be specific to Depakote compared with other epilepsy drugs."

Also getting one birth defect doesn’t decrease the chances of getting any of the others.

These are severe birth defects whose likelihood any rational person would want to do everything possible to minimize by consulting with their doctor and either adjusting their intake or eliminating altogether certain drugs from the combination of multiple drugs they are taking. The woman in this case did none of that because she is not capable of making a rational decision regarding a child’s welfare.

64

[quote]JayPierce wrote:

[quote]Sifu wrote:

I think that if in the first or second trimester you know that that you are going to produce a flipper baby who is going to spend it’s entire existence as a spastic in a wheel chair with a dribble cup under it’s chin, then maybe the most compassionate thing you can do is terminate the pregnancy. [/quote]

This is a disgusting statement, my friend. I mean, should we do the same thing to the elderly after they have outlived their usefulness? How about a teenager that is crippled and brain-damaged in an auto accident? Should Dr. Hawking’s friends and family have just given up on him because he is such a burden?

All rhetorical, just posting so maybe you’ll think about it. The only difference I can figure is the fact that you haven’t seen the child yet, so;

If they told you that there was a “spastic flipper baby” already in a coffin, and all you had to do was stick a gun in the hole where her head is and pull the trigger, could you do it? You don’t have to look, just BLAM! and we’ll throw some dirt on top of it.

Could you ask someone else to? Could you ask someone else to stick the gun in and fire, even if they didn’t know there was a “spastic flipper baby” in there? How about if the roles were reversed;

Someone asks you to put a gun in a hole and fire a round (just for believability, we’ll say they lie and tell you they’re doing a ballistics experiment), and then they tell you that there was a baby in there. Oh, but don’t worry. It was probably just a spastic flipper baby that would never amount to anything. Yeah, his mom wanted him, but we decided this was best.

Again, I don’t expect a response. Just food for thought.[/quote]

This is the way I see it. There already are a lot of people who have severe disabilities and it takes a lot to care for them. We should be doing what we can to limit adding to that number.

I understand how you may see it as harsh or even ruthless to consider aborting a fetus that we know may be severely deformed. But the truth is we live in a world of harsh realities that requires tough choices be made.

There are millions of children around the world who are starving to the point that they will not develop normally and be damaged for life or even die. What it takes to provide lifetime care for one severely deformed person who will never have a productive life could raise dozens of those children so they can be healthy productive members of society.

65

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Sifu, you are normally a rather thoughtful poster on this forum. On this subject you reveal a seriously foolish side of yourself. A shallow intellect apparently hides in there. I’m surprised.[/quote]

Sorry to disappoint you but I call things as I see them. What I can say for myself is I don’t mindlessly subscribe to one ideology or another. So just because people of my “political persuasion” think a certain way it doesn’t mean I am going to sign on without giving it some thought. Sometimes it goes your way, sometimes it doesn’t.

Personally I don’t think abortion is a wonderful thing, but I don’t think it’s fair to force a woman to go through such a life changing body function. So it should be legal within some reasonable guidelines such as the pregnancy should not be far advanced. From that starting point then I think the most reasonable, best way to reduce abortions as much as possible is to enthusiastically encourage the use of birth control.

However many of the so called right to life people are also opponents of birth control. I see supporting both of those positions at the same time as contradictory, therefore there must be a reason other than “the right to life” that is really motivating them.

66

[quote]ZEB wrote:
The number of babies that are aborted because of birth defects is tiny. Abortion is the new birth control. “Preganant? Oops…time to have an abortion.”

It’s sick, really sick. In fact no one here will actually know how sick until there is a time when you look back and say (as we do with slavery) how in the world did we let that happen?[/quote]

Actually Zeb abortion is just about the oldest form of birth control. Forcing it out of the doctor’s office back into the back alley was rather sick as well.

This is a situation with no winners. People just need to be more careful.

70

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Sifu wrote:

…Forcing it out of the doctor’s office back into the back alley was rather sick as well.

[/quote]

What a tired line. Can you really not come up with anything fresher than that?
[/quote]

It’s tired because it’s true. In 2006–a year before abortion was legalized in Mexico City–the abortion rate in Mexico was 40% higher than in the United States, despite the fact that it was banned in most of the country:

I’m not saying abortion should be legal, but we might as well recognize reality. Criminalize the procedure and illegal underground abortions will skyrocket.

71

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Sifu wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Sifu, you are normally a rather thoughtful poster on this forum. On this subject you reveal a seriously foolish side of yourself. A shallow intellect apparently hides in there. I’m surprised.[/quote]

Sorry to disappoint you but I call things as I see them.

[/quote]

Oh, I have no doubt you did exactly that. Your contempt for unborn children that don’t meet your health standards that qualify them as worthy of life was completely evident.

What a trooper!

So if one does subscribe to an ideology that protects innocent human life it’s mindless, huh? Even those despicable, worthy of death “flipper babies?”[/quote]

Why don’t we just go Spartan on this issue and toss ‘defective’ born babies off a cliff. Same thing basically as aborting ‘flipper baby’.

73

[quote]pushharder wrote:

In terms of your final statement it could easily be argued that “criminalizing” first degree murder “causes underground” murder “to skyrocket.” So what?[/quote]

I know I say this a lot, but: all analogies limp. Illegal abortions increase the likelihood of the mother’s death. This element of the equation is vital, but it does not have an analog in your murder scenario.

We’re not talking about murder, we’re talking about abortion. So it behooves us to talk about abortion.

Regarding the rest of your post, I tend to agree. The number of fetuses brought to term and delivered would in all likelihood be far larger than the number of women who died from complications or malpractice owing to a lack of official oversight. So from a utilitarian standpoint, it is difficult to be pro-choice.

76

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Sifu wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Sifu, you are normally a rather thoughtful poster on this forum. On this subject you reveal a seriously foolish side of yourself. A shallow intellect apparently hides in there. I’m surprised.[/quote]

Sorry to disappoint you but I call things as I see them.

[/quote]

Oh, I have no doubt you did exactly that. Your contempt for unborn children that don’t meet your health standards that qualify them as worthy of life was completely evident.

What a trooper!

So if one does subscribe to an ideology that protects innocent human life it’s mindless, huh? Even those despicable, worthy of death “flipper babies?”[/quote]

I find it interesting that you would use the word contempt to describe my attitude towards the unborn. I say that because it is apparent to me that there is a great deal of contempt for the right of a women to have control of her body from the right to life community. It’s like once they get pregnant they are nothing more than an incubator and their life doesn’t matter.

I also see contempt for the born. We can’t take care of every child in this world now. There is not enough food, clean water, medical care etc… But somehow it’s okay to ignore the needs of children who could be healthy if they could only get enough food and instead allocate extra resources to one who is only ever going to need more.

What I meant by mindlessly subscribing to an ideology is most of the views I’ve expressed in this forum could be considered conservative. But now I have deviated from the primary plank of Republican party platform that just gave us four more years of the Obama administration and all the wonderful things he is going to do to this country.

It’s not just the babies that are deformed that end up being considered despicable. This is another hypocrisy I see. You right to lifers are all so keen to get the baby born because you just care oh so much about “the baby”. But once it’s out of that womb it’s on it’s own and man it better not let itself become damaged by growing up in a broken home where it is unwanted. Because if that happens the only right to lifers who are going to care about that baby are the ones who have a lucrative contract with the bureau of prisons.