Abortion

[Headcoveredlady]

Baptistbeliever,
Why is it correct to choose the mother's life over the child? I asked my husband about this years ago. He said if the doctors ever asked him which one he would say, "You do your best to save them both." With modern obstetrics I think this situation is very, very rare anyway.
To the others,
Yes I agree that small children cannot handle the graphic pictures. I teach my children by showing them how wonderful the baby is in utero. So, that when they are to learn what abortion is they will be appalled.

HCL

 

[Helen]

This may sound terribly unbiblical, but I believe in most cases the death of the mother would harm more people than the death of the baby. The mother already has an active place in society with people depending on her. This really does count for something. Maybe it is part of loving one's fellow man? I am very glad such situations as having to choose between them is so rare, but I would go with the mother, too, assuming she is not comatose, etc. If she has other children especially, she can always try to have another sibling for them, but no one could ever replace her as Mommy; not really...

I am not being harsh to step-parents. Or adoptive parents (I have five adopted children). But the simple fact is that Mommy is Mommy, and that is a very important person in the life of a child.

Which does not even mention the marriage relationship and how is Daddy going to care for a(nother) child with Mommy gone?

One last point -- especially if the mother is not Christian, she should live! She needs time to repent and come to Christ if that is ever going to happen in her life. The baby is totally safe in God's hands and in no spiritual danger.

 

[crazycat]

Baptist Believer
I am a pediatric emergency room registered nurse. I work in a speciality hospital for children that recieve patients with common colds to trauma. I have also worked in obstetrics as well.

Why is it wrong to abort a baby to save a mother's life. First of all, it is very rare that that situation arises. Secondly, we would be saying God made a mistake by allowing this child to be concieved. God makes no mistakes. Now I am not saying that if the mother needs to be induced early for health reasons that that is wrong. Because it is not. With todays technology (I have worked in NICU newborn Intensive care unit) we can save the babies that God inteneded to be saved.
Thirdly, I believe the Bible
Psalm 139:13-16
v13 For thou hast possed my reigns: thou hast covered me in my mother's womb.
v14 I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well.
v15 My substance was not hid from thee, when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest part of the earth.
v16 Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when yet there was none of them.
I think this verse speaks for itself. God knew that the baby in the womb would have down sydrome or anencephaly (dies shortly after birth because of absence of all brain, but the medulla), but God choose for these children to be concieved anyway. God also knows if a pregnancy will take the life of the mother or not, and he chooses. It should be God's choice not mans.
Murder is murder is murder it doesn't matter what one thinks it matters what God says!

Think how easy it could of been for Mary to have had an abortion. They had them back in that time. Herbal abortion has been around for ages. I am so thankful she decided to give birth anyway.

 

[David Cooke Jr]

Originally posted by Headcoveredlady:
Mr. Cooke,
You say that the baby had intestines that were growing outside of the baby's body. I asked you two questions. One, could the radiologist be wrong? And two, could God heal the baby? You answered the first question by telling me I did not care about incest victims and that they would surely die if they gave birth to these type of babies.
You did not answer my second question. This really is the crux of the matter. Can God be trusted to do whatever He thinks is right in any situation? Could not the God who created the baby with the inestines growing outside of his body, heal the baby? What right have any of us to decide who lives and who dies?
Actually the Lord cares very much for victims of incest, rape, and babies conceived by fathers who leave the mothers. There are crisis pregnancy centers that can help all of the above victims.
It seems that you too care for these young people who are victimized in this way. But, does that make the baby a criminal, worthy of death?
Are you actually saying that if the radiologist sees something wrong with any baby the mother ought to pay an abortionist to murder the baby? Where in Scripture can you find support for this view?

HCL

Yes God can heal the baby, but it looked like he had chosen not to. That left her with a choice, save herself or go down with the ship. I guess she could have just said, hey, its God's will that I die too or maybe he'll save me with a miracle at the last second. Let's wait and see.
Or maybe she could have just gambled that the expert was wrong.
As for scriptural support, I'm not going to debate you because I do not feel either of us will change your mind. I will tell you that from research I did in law school, abortion was not considered the breaking of the "thou shalt not murder" commandment by jews of Jesus' day, and that the Roman Catholic Church did not formally oppose abortion untill around 1800, even though, as you know, abortion has been around for thousands of years. Yet their is no "thou shalt not commit abortion" commandmentment? Why is that?

[ July 08, 2002, 08:46 AM: Message edited by: David Cooke, Jr. ]

 

[David Cooke Jr]

<<<<<

Originally posted by Don:

Can you 100% for sure tell us the radiologist wasn't wrong in the case you presented to us?

If not, then the point is totally did the girl have to allow a doctor to murder her unborn child....

Yes, it's a crying shame that perverts out there are raping children.

It's also a crying shame that we somehow believe we have to make two victims instead of one....

>>>>>
Nobody got murdered.
Its this line of thinking that makes alot of people more pro-life than they ought to be. The demonstrated lack of common sense and compassion-
A poor little girl incestuosly raped, pregnant with a baby that appears doomed to die and that will kill her too unless she gets an abortion, and you want to talk about how doctors can be wrong and nothing is 100%?
Yes, its a crying shame this baby was aborted. I guarantee you this girl wanted that baby to live even more than you wanted her to risk her life over a lottery ticket's chance (you know, those tickets that people throw in the trash after their dreams are dashed).
Life gives us hard choices sometimes. But that doesn't mean we have to be "hard" either. We don't have to be so hard and judgemental that we call a poor rape victim a murderer b/c she didn't risk her life over somebody else's unyielding ethic: abortion is always murder, even if it saves your life.
You know, nothing in this life that people do is 100%. To use your logic, a woman could never save herself even if it looks like a doomed baby could kill her during birth. I love our sisters and mothers more than that. Your obvious zeal for our Lord is (in my opinion) misguided here. That girl (and the many like her I meet) need our help and prayers. They don't need our condemnation for saving their own lives.

[ July 08, 2002, 08:53 AM: Message edited by: David Cooke, Jr. ]

 

[crazycat]

David Cooke> "why isnt there a commandment thou shalt not have an abortion"

There is it falls under the umbrella commandment that "thou shall not kill". God makes NO mistakes!

 

[Don]

If the radiologist was wrong, then yes, Mr. Cooke, the baby was murdered.

Well, now, Dave, you just introduced another piece of the puzzle.

Not only do you seem to be refusing to answer whether you can prove 100% that the radiologist was without error, now you've indicated that the girl's life was in danger--something you failed to mention in your previous messages, and which now must be supported.

As in, how was the girl's life in danger?

Previously, you simply indicated that the organs were developing outside the baby's body, and have refused to provide what proof you might have that the radiologist was 100% correct in this diagnosis.

We are ALL child advocates here, and want to see this rapist pay for his crime, Mr. Cooke.

But I reiterate: Unless you can show that the radiologist was correct in his/her diagnosis, and can now provide proof that the girl's life was in danger, then you're focusing this thread on the rape.

And you must admit, whether you want to or not, that if the girl's life wasn't in danger, and the radiologist wasn't correct, then there were two victims here, not just one.

 

[Helen]

Folks, this is getting out of hand. The medical community obviously was compassionate towards this poor young mother and they made the best decision they knew how to make given the information at hand.

We all do that.

And we all can be subject to 'Monday morning quarterbacking' and our decisions theoretically torn limb from limb.

Take the story as something to think about, pray about, and be prepared about if you ever find yourself in a family where something similar might happen and you are needed for some calm and wise counsel.

The baby in this case is safe in heaven. The young mother is shaken, and I pray not shattered, but alive. Life goes on. We do the best we can in hard situations.

Consider this, though, please: if the doctors had waited to see what would have happened to the baby and the mother ended up dying, they could have been successfully prosecuted for murder or at least manslaughter. They were in a no-win position, I think, and, again, did the best they knew how to do.

 

[David Cooke Jr]

Helen, thanks for re-introducing some common sense here.
Don, you are right-I forgot to mention that birthing the child would endanger the mother (also a child) in my first post. I did mention it in the July 6th post.

[ July 08, 2002, 08:52 AM: Message edited by: David Cooke, Jr. ]

 

[Baptist Believer]

Originally posted by crazycat:
Baptist Believer
I am a pediatric emergency room registered nurse. I work in a speciality hospital for children that recieve patients with common colds to trauma. I have also worked in obstetrics as well.

Wow! I'm sure you do great work.

Why is it wrong to abort a baby to save a mother's life. First of all, it is very rare that that situation arises.

Yes, I agree. This is more of a hypothetical case... but it does happen occasionally.

Secondly, we would be saying God made a mistake by allowing this child to be concieved. God makes no mistakes. Now I am not saying that if the mother needs to be induced early for health reasons that that is wrong. Because it is not. With todays technology (I have worked in NICU newborn Intensive care unit) we can save the babies that God inteneded to be saved.

I don't know if we are thinking of the same sort of situations... I'm not talking about birth defects but rather an emergency situation where the mother's life is in serious danger as well as the child's. Perhaps in the aftermath of a car accident...

Thirdly, I believe the Bible
[snip] I think this verse speaks for itself. God knew that the baby in the womb would have down sydrome or anencephaly (dies shortly after birth because of absence of all brain, but the medulla), but God choose for these children to be concieved anyway. God also knows if a pregnancy will take the life of the mother or not, and he chooses. It should be God's choice not mans.

Yes, I believe the Bible too. But again you seem to be talking about birth defects instead of emergency situations. (I think you're thinking about the other part of this thread where the child was formed with internal organs outside the body. I'm not arguing that case.)

Murder is murder is murder it doesn't matter what one thinks it matters what God says!

True.

Think how easy it could of been for Mary to have had an abortion. They had them back in that time. Herbal abortion has been around for ages. I am so thankful she decided to give birth anyway.

But Mary knew the Child within her was conceived by the Holy Spirit... It's a different situation.

Thanks for your perspective!

 

[David Cooke Jr]

Originally posted by crazycat:
David Cooke> "why isnt there a commandment thou shalt not have an abortion"

There is it falls under the umbrella commandment that "thou shall not kill". God makes NO mistakes!

The commandment is not "thou shall not kill", its "thou shall not murder". Jews of Jesus' day did not consider abortion murder, yet Jesus did not address it directly. Mind you, I'm not saying abortion is not a sin, but the Bible does not call it murder (aren't there different penalties for causing a miscarriage than for killing someone in leviticus?).

 

[Scarlett O.]

Exodus 21:22-25, I think, is what you are referring to. This passage comes in a larger passage of laws against violence.

And it is not talking about abortion.

I basically says that if men are fighting and a pregnant women is hit and the force causes her to go into a premature birth, then there are two choices.

1. If there is no harm to her or the baby, that is if the baby is viable enough and lives and the mother, too, then he is to pay a fine set by the husband and approved by a judge.

2. If there is harm ("mischief"), that is to say if either the mother or the baby die as a result, then he is to pay with his own life. A life for a life.

This passage is not about abortion, but is about manslaughter. Unintentional, nevertheless, due to violence and irresponsibility.

Peace-

YSIC
Scarlett O.

 

[David Cooke Jr]

Scarlett,
thanks for checking that. I'm in court today and I don't have time to research until lunch. I want to say there is another passage but I could be wrong. I will try to check at lunch. Thanks again.

 

[crazycat]

Baptist Bill
I believe what you are talking about with am emergency situation like a car wreck to save the mothers life to perform an abortion is still wrong.
The siuation you are discussing is a abruptio placentae in which case usually through tramatic situation (ie car wreck, being hit in the abdomen, or even rollar coaster rides) The placenta tears away from the uterus and can cause hemorrhaging. It occurs after 24 weeks of pregnancy. (My source is from the maternal- Infant nursing book second edition by dickason silverman and schult) BINGO!!!!! A 24 weeker can live out side of the womb, via they will end up on life support and may have severe problems, but it is possible! In emergency situation it is possible to do a c-section in less then a minute. This is faster then what an abortion would be. Even if the child does not survive at least you gave God a chance to be in control. When sucking the brains out of the baby you are remaining in control.
I still say abortion is murder! Any type is murder for any reason. GOD makes NO mistakes!!!!!!

 

[Headcoveredlady]

Crazy cat,
Thank you for that post. I personally knew of a woman who delivered a baby at 20 weeks!! The baby was in ICU for a while. But, he was fine. They kept little cotton balls on his eyes and helped him breathe and stay warm. But, he made it. Praise be to God. And there are abortionists in America who would have gladly ripped that baby out of his mommies womb and cut a hole in the back of his neck and vaccuumed his little brains out.
I am sick to my stomach and grieved in my spirit when I hear of professing Christians defending abortion. Of those of you defending these murders have you ever counseled with a post abortive woman? Listen to them, they will tell you about how it went at the abortion mill and the pain and anger that followed for years after they murdered their babies.

HCL

 

[Baptist Believer]

Originally posted by crazycat:
I believe what you are talking about with am emergency situation like a car wreck to save the mothers life...

Yes, that's the kind of scenario I was imagining...

to perform an abortion is still wrong.

Okay...

The siuation you are discussing is a abruptio placentae in which case usually through tramatic situation (ie car wreck, being hit in the abdomen, or even rollar coaster rides) The placenta tears away from the uterus and can cause hemorrhaging. It occurs after 24 weeks of pregnancy. A 24 weeker can live out side of the womb, via they will end up on life support and may have severe problems, but it is possible!

That's good to hear!

In emergency situation it is possible to do a c-section in less then a minute. This is faster then what an abortion would be.

Okay... Didn't know that. Obviously you know exactly what you are talking about and my knowledge is out-of-date.

My mother was a nurse and my father had a biology background (he served as a corpsman in a field hospital in World War II) so I have some medical knowledge as a result of growing up around my parents. I didn't realize how far pediatrics has come in just the last decade or so.

I'm delighted to learn that the unlikely situation is almost completely unknown now.

Perhaps I have have not been thinking clearly about the situation. My ethic here has been along the lines of having to choose between the mother and the child because there was not time or ability to take care of both at once in a life-or-death situation. Maybe the term abortion is the wrong word to use in that situation. In any case, the situation I am imagining is probably extremely unlikely and should not be really used as a test case for ethical decision-making.

Just to make sure everyone is clear, I do not advocate abortion.

Thanks!

 

[LadyEagle]

Take a good look at this picture. It's one of the most remarkable photographs ever taken. The tiny hand of a foetus reaches out from a mother's womb to clasp a surgeon's healing finger. It is, by the way, 21 weeks old, an age at which it could still be legally aborted. The tiny hand in the picture above belongs to a baby which is due to be born on December 28. It was taken during an operation in America recently. It is a medical development in the control of the effects of spina bifida ... and on a picture which will reverberate through the on-going abortion debate here.

http://members.tripod.com/~joseromia/samuel.html

PS: Surgery was pioneered at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, TN. There are other links about it, but this is a good one.

 

[LadyEagle]

Originally posted by Don:
Johnv, if the baby is already dead, is it really an abortion?

Wouldn't it actually be called a miscarraige?

"Abortion" literally means the termination of a pregnancy. If the child is still-born, it's not an abortion.

Don, actually johnv is correct in his terminology.

The medical terminology for miscarriage is "spontaneous abortion."

Impending miscarriage is a "threatened abortion" in medical terms. It can also be categorized as inevitable, incomplete, complete, or missed, according to the stages of the miscarriage. A missed abortion is usually the death in utero of the embryo or the fetus before 20 weeks with retained products of conception.

All of the above are quite different from an "elective" abortion.

Typical medical treatment of a spontaneous or missed abortion is a D&C (dilatation and curettage) procedure to insure all products of conception are evacuated.

All of this is strictly medical terminology not laymen's terms.

Elective abortions are not performed in hospitals, except in a very rare case where the mom's life is threatened (very, very rare). Nearly 100% of the time, all efforts are made to save the lives of both mother and child. Neonatal and preemie medicine have come a long way. Neonatal intensive care units are common (NICU) in most major hospitals. Nearly all elective abortions are performed in abortion clinics and the aborted fetuses are sold commercially (cosmetics, etc.).