Abortion

Archived Posts from this Category

February 16, 2010

Abortions Based on Race and Sex

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion
[11] Comments 

Well, here’s a new one…

It seems that a bill has been introduced in the Georgia legislature that would make it a crime “to solicit a woman to have an abortion based on the race or sex of the unborn child.”   And, to promote the legislation, the Georgia Right to Life Committee has posted billboards throughout the state with a picture of a black baby and a caption reading “Black children are an endangered species.”  It then mentions a website entitled www.toomanyaborted.com.

So, when I read this, then read it again, I sat back, looked out the window and started to think…. 

Do women really abort because of race?  In fact, when an ultrasound is performed, can you even tell the race of the baby?    If that were even possible, would a white woman who has had sex with a black man ask about the race and abort it if she did not want a black baby?  Or visa versa with a black woman and a white man?   Is that what happens in the real world?   

What about an abortion based on sex?   Now that is one that I presume might happen as there are some cultures that prefer one sex over the other.   Do abortion doctors even ask the woman why she is aborting?  

And, the more I look at the language of the bill, it says it is illegal “to solicit a woman…..”    Are there abortion doctors out there who are “soliciting” women to have abortions based on race or sex?     

I am not sure what Georgia Right to Life is trying to do here.  Do they really care that the majority of abortions in their state are performed on minorities?    Or are they trying to promote some kind of race war?  It’s all very strange to me.   Still, I would rather have them waste their time on silliness like this than some legislation that would truly harm the pro-choice movement.   And I would love to hear from a supporter of the bill to give me more details.

 

February 11, 2010

Obama and the Supreme Court

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion
[6] Comments 

I just read an article about the current make-up of the U.S. Supreme Court and how President Obama might get a few more appointments.    The article noted that supporters of legal abortion are encouraged by the prospect.

Not so fast.  

At this time, there appears to be 6 votes in favor of Roe v. Wade and three for reversal, although some would argue that Justice Anthony Kenney is a wild card and should he vote to repeal Roe, the tally would be only  5-4 in favor of Roe.   So, worst case scenario is opponents of Roe only need one more vote.

Whatever legal analysis you wish to believe, the fact is that an Obama appointment will not guarantee anything.  Indeed, we could lose ground. 

Let’s say that one of the pro-choice justices retires or dies.   Make it Justice John Stevens, currently a solid pro-choice vote.  Obama then gets to nominate someone.  As we have seen in the past, there is no guarantee that the President is going to get exactly what he wants.  When the President meets the prospective nominee, he does not ask him or her about their position on abortion.  Instead, they talk in vague generalities.   Then the nominee goes to the Senate where they duck and dodge the tough questions for a few days.  If the nominee has no track record from previous decisions, it could very well be a crap shoot. 

History is ripe with examples of Presidents getting someone different than what they expected.    President John F Kennedy got Byron White, a personal friend who turned out to be a conservative.   President George H.W. Bush nominated Justice David Souter, who ultimately supported abortion rights and was considered a liberal jurist.    

So, pro-choice groups should not be so comfortable.   If a pro-choice Justice suddenly left the bench, there is absolutely no guarantee that his replacement would be the same.

 

February 8, 2010

That Anti-Climatic Super Bowl Commercial

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion
[4] Comments 

So what was the hullabaloo all about? 

 I mean, did anyone even see that “pro-life” commercial that aired during the Super Bowl?  

For weeks, the condemnations were flying, CBS was attacked, there were accusations of unfair treatment, national editorials, etc., etc.    For what?   For that dumb little commercial that aired once in the first quarter?  

It happened all so fast.  I was getting a bowl of (non-buttered) popcorn when I saw Tim Tebow, the University of Florida quarterback who had caused all the commotion.  As far as I could tell, the commercial didn’t even mention abortion!   All I could see was Tebow and his lovely mom.  I thought I heard him (or her) say something about “life.” 

This whole controversy started when the national pro-choice groups cried “foul” without even seeing the commercial.  I gotta be honest – I grow weary of the national groups that represent both sides of the abortion issue.  They have absolutely nothing to do except to sling arrows at each other through the media.  The scream and yell and, when they are inevitably “attacked,” they send out a fundraising letter asking their supporters to help “defend us from these pernicious attacks”   Then the money rolls in and they put probably 80 percent of what they raised back into the fundraising machine. 

For me, I “choose” to admire those in the trenches.  That means the doctors and clinic staff who help thousands of women every day.  And, yes, it means those true pro-lifers who put their money where their mouth is, i.e., those who actually adopt children or help a woman who has decided to have their baby.  There are well intentioned people on both sides of this contentious issue.  They are the ones to be congratulated.    

As for the national groups, put a sock in it.

 

February 7, 2010

Pro-Choicers Should Quit Complaining about SuperBowl Ad

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion
[7] Comments 

So, Focus on the Family, a national anti-abortion group, is going to run a television commercial during the Super Bowl.  It apparently stars University of Florida quarterback Tim Tebow and reportedly conveys a “pro-life” message.     In response, the national pro-choice organizations are screaming foul, it’s not fair, it’s a political decision to air it, blah, blah, blah.   Ironically, by complaining so much about it they are probably guaranteeing that it will get a larger audience.     

I am already growing weary of the noise from the pro-choicers.  Think about it.  They are complaining about an organization that a) thought of the idea and b) raised enough money to pay for the ad.    Why didn’t the pro-choice movement do the same?   With their national base of support, they could have raised millions of dollars to do an ad advocating their position.  This reminds me of the stink pro-choicers put up about the “Choose Life” license plates.  In certain states, you can buy this special plate for an extra fee and the money will go to pro-life counseling centers.  The pro-life movement accomplished this by persuading their legislatures to make it law.  What a concept!  Yet, the pro-choice movement complained.  My question is:  why isn’t the pro-choice movement trying to get “Pro-Choice” license plates?      

I am also not going to buy the argument that CBS, in allowing the Tebow ad, is showing its conservative colors because sometime in the past they rejected a pro-gay rights ad.  Instead of whining about how unfair it is, the pro-choice movement should be busting its butt to raise the political stakes, to make it so that rejecting a pro-choice ad in the future would be politically and economically unpalatable. 

Quit complaining, take the bull by the horns, organize, lobby, raise money, speak up for ABORTION rights and, while I’m at it, get rid of that “choice” nonsense.  The younger generation does not know what “choice” means, but they know what abortion is – so let’s talk about it and let’s start putting a commercial together for next year’s Super Bowl.

 

February 2, 2010

Killing Abortion Doctors will not stop Abortions

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion
[7] Comments 

Over the last few days, Court TV ran the trial of Scott Roeder, the man who killed Doctor Tiller while he served as an usher in his church.   Roeder says that he killed Tiller to “save babies.”   That got me to thinking.

A number of doctors who provided abortion services have been killed over the years, but does anyone really think that murdering an abortion provider will “save babies?”    I think not.

A woman makes an appointment to have an abortion.   Probably ninety nine percent of the time, they have no idea who the doctor is.   After all, for the most part they will only see him or her for a few minutes during the procedure.   Let’s say a woman has an appointment on a Tuesday and, on Monday, the doctor is killed.    Does anyone really think that that woman will change her mind about having an abortion?      No way.

What the woman will do is go to the Yellow Pages or the Internet and look under “abortion” and seek another abortion provider.    She will then make an appointment and ultimately have her abortion.   That “baby,” despite the murder of the original doctor, will not have been “saved.”

Sure, if the doctor was in South Dakota, where there is only one doctor, then it means the woman will have to travel further to procure her abortion.    But, as we learned when abortion was illegal in most states, women will go to incredible lengths to terminate their pregnancy.   There was a time when women were flying across the country to states like New York or California, spending thousands of dollars, to find a doctor who would perform an abortion.  Or, worse, women resorted to self-induced abortions, oftentimes resulting in serious health problems or even death.

The fact is that abortion providers exist because there is a need for abortion providers.    These doctors are taking incredible risks to help women.   They should be congratulated every day.

 

January 26, 2010

March for Life

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
[22] Comments 

March for Life

During the annual “March for Life” on Friday, I happened upon a “pro-choice” rally.  Listening to the speeches of various leaders of the movement, I suddenly realized why we may be losing the battle.

Throughout the hour that I was there, no one with a microphone in their hands said “abortion.”  It was all about “choice” this and “choice” that.   Protect our “freedom to choose.”  The A word was conspicuous by its absence.

I understand that we want to preserve the right of women to have a choice in their reproductive decisions, but let’s face it, folks, everyone with half a brain understands that one of those “choices” is, dare I say it, ABORTION.    When we say we want to give women that option it implies that we approve of that option, just like we all approve of adoption or childbirth.

When we do not talk about the abortion option, we contribute to the stigma of abortion.  Why can’t we just say we support legal abortion, that legal abortion has saved hundreds and thousands of lives over the years, that it can be a good decision?   Even when the word is mentioned, it is in the context of an apology.    “Abortion is the most difficult, emotional decision a woman will ever make.”    Perhaps true for some people, but can we actually make such a broad, sweeping declaration?     Poppycock.   For many women, it was not a difficult decision.  Indeed, it was a relief when they decided and when they had the procedure.

Let’s start talking about the benefits of legal abortion.   Over one million women a year get one.  Why the heck are we hiding behind the mantle of “choice?”   Why not face the issue head on?

By not talking about abortion, we cede that very important part of the debate to the anti-abortion movement.  They get to define what abortion is, they get to stigmatize those courageous doctors and their staff who help women every day.   They get to prohibit the so-called “partial birth abortion” which was just another option for women and their doctors.

I don’t know when that public relations consultant came out with the word “choice.”   It was certainly decades ago.   And now we are one vote away from having “choice” eliminated by the Supreme Court.   What does that tell you about that strategy?

We need to be honest with the public.  We need to stand up for LEGAL ABORTION and toss out the buzz words that mean nothing to a younger generation.   Abortion is a benefit to the health of women.   Abortion is okay.   Just say it.

 

January 22, 2010

Roe v Wade Anniversary – Let’s Celebrate our Freedoms!

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion, Abortion Discussion, Abortion Law, Abortion Rights, Bush, Roe V Wade | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , |
[10] Comments 

A few miles from where I sit, the anti-abortion crowd is assembling (in the rain) near the White House, getting ready for their annual March on Washington.  What I have never understood is how the anti-abortion movement made this “their” day?

They march to the Supreme Court, dragging little kids with them, making them holding disgusting signs.  They give vicious, anti-women speeches, they excoriate doctors who perform abortions, they swamp the Capitol Hill offices demanding that Roe v Wade be overturned.

Why are we not marching on the Capitol?   Why are we not celebrating this Supreme Court decision that liberated millions of women?  Why are we not barraging the media with stories of women who were saved by abortion?   Why are we not publicly praising this decision that gave women control over their own bodies? Why are we not thanking the doctors and staff that work at the clinics?

The anti-abortion movement has successfully stigmatized abortion, which has lead to an erosion of support for the pro-choice position.  Meanwhile, even the pro-choice movement tends to shy away from the word “abortion.”   Those of us who support abortion rights have to speak up about the benefits of the availability of this procedure.   We need to celebrate how abortion has actually saved hundreds and thousands of lives of women who, were it not for Roe v Wade, might be dead by a self-induced abortion. We do not need to be afraid of the word “abortion.”

Meanwhile, women who have had abortions need to speak up and talk about their experiences.   I trust women to be able to make this decision on their own, unlike anti-abortion zealots who want to control women, who want to force them to raise children.  But women whose lives were saved by abortion need to relate that experience and not hide in the shadows.   Their silence is deafening.  Over one million women a year receive an abortion.   Why are we still under attack?

We also should be celebrating the election of a pro-choice President. Barack Obama won a landslide, generation changing election while not shying away from his support for abortion rights.  We should be in front of the White House today, holding signs saying “Thank you, Mr. President.”

There will be battles ahead.   There will no doubt be vacancies on the U.S. Supreme Court that need to be filled.  Yet, while I am heartened that we have a pro-choice President, we must not let our guard down.  We must INSIST that the next appointments reflect the President’s support for abortion rights.

Today’s anniversary should be a wake up call to the pro-choice movement.  We need to take back Roe v Wade day, it is our day of liberation!   It’s too late to do anything on this particular day but let’s vow to reclaim this anniversary as a celebration of our essential freedoms!

 

January 22, 2010

Rejoice! Today is a day of Liberty!

Posted by Elena Carvin under Abortion, Abortion & Religion, Abortion Discussion, Abortion Rights, ProLife, Roe V Wade, Supreme Court, Vote | Tags: , , , , |
[10] Comments 

Abortion

The Liberty we recognize today, stands so immensely tall, proud, and strong, it’s message of glowing hope and freedom travels through the minds of the world, and resonates, drawing individuals who suffer under tyranny to our shores in our third century still.  We are the flagship of freedom in a sea of that tyranny.

An example for the world.  Women shall not be subjugated in this country.  They will not tolerate it.  Neither will men, as we all are determined that no one regardless of their attributes be denied the inalienable rights so well articulated.

Our Republic evolves and continue to create the most optimal society. We prove over time, people can govern themselves. There is no other option.

Liberty in her Statuesque form stands literally in concrete and steel, on the impervious massive pedestal of righteousness. She stands as a metaphor, and as an image, enduring, and indelible, unknown to few, celebrated worldwide.

Roe v Wade is in the company of the most important decisions that the Supreme Court has accurately ruled upon.  The decision reaches back through the historical events that were the maturation of our Republic. Now, again, a precedent etched in the Granite of Freedom, IT WILL ENDURE.  It is in our self governance, our own implicit contract with society, the binding of freedom, that we are in comfort that the flaw has been fixed, and shall stand. We will continue this effort on all fronts, tearing down any barriers as we find them.

The sentinels of freedom shall never be unaware of attack. The guard never let down.  There is still work to be done, and it shall. We are a Union of self governance that proves to the world that it can be done. There is no other choice, except the choice to abide by the laws we construct for ourselves.   And we take comfort in that knowledge.

Rejoice on this blessed day the Anniversary of Roe v Wade.  As few in this world have what we do, as we routinely do not even notice as we journey though our lives in freedom.  Freedom to control our own bodies, and make our own decisions.

The old notions will die off as they have over the generations, and freedom will endure and the people of our nation will cradle in that joyous comfort.

 

January 18, 2010

Forget the Religion Already. We live in a Republic.

Posted by Elena Carvin under Abortion | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
[5] Comments 

It has been with great dissapointment that many have commented using religion as a basis for discussion.

One recent commentor, was inciting hatred an dposssibly even worse. In response to Aleen, I am compelled to reply on this post.

I’m tired of the same old nonsense, but now after Dr. George Tiller, a wonderful caring man, was murdered in church, it must be said again, sadly to people who’s minds just don’t work.

Terrorism is not OK. When you are a baby, you implicitly sign a contract with society. A social contract. You probably don’t know it, bubt you do.  SO if you don’t want to work within the system, then LEAVE.  No one wants you.  Even the vast majority of people that harbor your crazy belief systems.

Wow, The bible itself recommends INFANTICIDE, talk about a worthless book. No more Bible nonsense. It is so annoying. What deteriorating brain would use that as a valid authoritative source on anything? This is The UNION of The United States of America. Not a Bible belt bonehead study group. So if you want a theocracy, go live in IRAN.

But I’ll indulge for a moment.

A Republic.

From the essence of the beginning was made clear, first and foremost (!), that we are not a theocracy. They figured out how stupid that was well over 300 years ago, and figured out how to make a Union.

One of the most IMPORTANT pieces was Separation of Religions from the Republic. The founders constructed it so, Without ambiguity. Washington
Adams (Even though one of the few that believed some of this stuff knew it should be out of government as did his son.) Jefferson
Madison
Monroe
Quincy Adams
Jackson defended the Union (despite his horrific crimes),

Lincoln (A Republican) did it again, only to be murdered by a christian.

And the war cost, what, 500,000 American lives?

Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation. Then fought for the 13th Amendment.
Then finally after he did so much good, some bonehead Christian kills him, while his friends try and Kill Seward (The Secretary of State) and other members of the cabinet.

McKinley assassinated

Theodore Roosevelt a Conservative, had to take charge, a Conservationist, did the same, and on and on.

Aleen, how could you be so clueless?

And inciting of violence?

You should be banned from the site.
There is scholarly information here. And misrepresent mistranslations, of languages you probably do not even speak, that have gone through well over a thousand years of revisions and editing.

It’s sad.

The Biblical God is NOT a pro-lifer, he advocates child murder, infanticide, child abuse and abortion: I see so many retarded ass Christians talking about abortion being a crime against God. It’s not a wonder that they are hard pressed to find a conclusive biblical statement to corroborate their position. In their determination to control woman they have been forced to rely on exceedingly weak sections such as “thou shall not kill”,”I kneweth thou in the womb” and their favorite: “When men strive together, and hurt a woman with child, so that there is a miscarriage, and yet no harm follows, the one who hurt her shall be fined, according as the woman’s husband shall lay upon; and he shall pay as the judges determine.

If any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth…“–Exodus 21:22-24 The problem here is that the man who injures a pregnant woman in the process, shall repay her according to the degree of injury inflicted on her, not the fetus. I am often dumbfounded at how Christians can assume that abortion is wrong judging by these feeble verses when the Bible clearly advocates infanticide and many other atrocities against children and pregnant women. I can no longer allow such ignorance of the Bible and deem it necessary to expose the true agenda. I am tired of the many young Christians who are brainwashed by their clergy. They are only taught the “love and mercy” parts of the Bible and never bother to read what is not so openly preached . The Church thrives off of speaking in half truths and concealing their blood soaked robes. Of course my job as preacher of an Atheist parish is to give a sermon about those things that the Bible TRUTHFULLY commands.

Here they are, god’s views on the unborn, the actions of righteous men” and god’s commands of infanticide and child abuse: (note-There are Torah verses in this list but I will not attack the Jewish faith for being pro-life since they are not rampant advocates of the matter.) Abortion: Hosea 9:11-16 Hosea prays for God’s intervention. “Ephraim shall bring forth his children to the murderer. Give them, 0 Lord: what wilt thou give? Give them a miscarrying womb and dry breasts. . .Ephraim is smitten, their root is dried up, they shall bear no fruit: yea though they bring forth, yet will I slay even the beloved fruit of their womb.” Clearly Hosea desires that the people of Ephraim can no longer have children. God of course obeys by making all their unborn children miscarry. Is not terminating a pregnancy unnaturally “abortion”? Numbers 5:11-21
The description of a bizarre, brutal and abusive ritual to be performed on a wife SUSPECTED of adultery. This is considered to be an induced abortion to rid a woman of another man’s child. Numbers 31:17 (Moses) “Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every women that hath known man by lying with him.” In other words: women that might be pregnant, which clearly is abortion for the fetus. Hosea 13:16 God promises to dash to pieces the infants of Samaria and the “their women with child shall be ripped up”.

Once again this god kills the unborn, including their pregnant mothers. 2 Kings 15:16 God allows the pregnant women of Tappuah (aka Tiphsah) to be “ripped open”. And the Christians have the audacity to say god is pro-life. How and the hell is it that Christians can read passages where God allows pregnant women to be murdered, yet still claim abortion is wrong? Infanticide: 1 Samuel 15:3 God commands the death of helpless “suckling” infants. This literally means that the children god killed were still nursing.

Psalms 135:8 & 136:10 Here god is praised for slaughtering little babies. Psalms 137:9 Here god commands that infants should be “dashed upon the rocks”. The murdering of children: Leviticus 20:9 “For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him.” Judges 11:30-40 Jephthah killed his young daughter (his only child) by burning her alive as a burnt sacrifice to the lord for he commanded it. Psalms 137:8-9 Prayer/song of vengeance “0 daughter of Babylon, who art to be destroyed; happy shall he be that rewardeth thee as thou hast served us. Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.” 2 Kings 6:28-29 “And the king said unto her, What aileth thee? And she answered, This woman said unto me, Give thy son, that we may eat him today, and we will eat my son tomorrow. So we boiled my son, and did eat him: and I said unto her on the next day, Give thy son, that we may eat him: and she hath hid her son.”

Deuteronomy 21:18-21 “If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them: Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.” Judges 19:24-29 “Behold, here is my daughter a maiden, and his concubine; them I will bring out now, and humble ye them, and do with them what seemeth good unto you: but unto this man do not so vile a thing. But the men would not hearken to him: so the man took his concubine, and brought her forth unto them; and they knew her, and abused her all the night until the morning: and when the day began to spring, they let her go. Then came the woman in the dawning of the day, and fell down at the door of the man’s house where her lord was, till it was light. And her lord rose up in the morning, and opened the doors of the house, and went out to go his way: and behold, the woman his concubine was fallen down at the door of the house, and her hands were upon the threshold. And he said unto her, Up, and let us be going. But none answered. Then the man took her up upon an ass, and the man rose up, and gat him unto his place. And when he was come into his house, he took a knife, and laid hold on his concubine, and divided her, together with her bones, into twelve pieces, and sent her into all the coasts of Israel.” To put it very bluntly this poor, young lady was murdered by her mate for being raped. Exodus 12:29 God killed, intentionally, every first-born child of every family in Egypt, simply because he was upset at the Pharaoh. And god caused the Pharaoh’s actions in the first place. Since when is it appropriate to murder children for their ruler’s forced action?

Exodus 20:9-10 God commands death for cursing out ones parents Joshua 8 God commanded the deaths of 12,000 men, women, and children of Ai. They were all slain in the ambush that was planned by god. 2 Kings 2:23-24 The prophet Elisha, was being picked on by some young boys from the city because of his bald head. The prophet turned around and cursed them in the Lords name. Then, two female bears came out of the woods and killed forty-two of them.

You would think that God could understand that sometimes the youthful make childish jokes. Calling someone “bald head” is far from being worthy of death. Leviticus 26:30 “And ye shall eat the flesh of your sons, and the flesh of your daughters shall ye eat.” 1 Samuel 15:11-18 God repents of having made Saul king since Saul refused to carry out God’s commandments (i.e., Saul refused to murder all the innocent women and children.) At least god realizes what an immoral, murderous pig he is on this one. I Kings 16:34 Laying the foundation for a city using your firstborn child and using your youngest son to set up the gates. Isaiah 13:15-18 If God can find you, he will “thrust you through,” smash your children “to pieces” before your eyes, and rape your wife. Jeremiah 11:22-23 God will kill the young men in war and starve their children to death. Jeremiah 19:7-9 God will make parents eat their own children, and friends eat each other. Lamentations 2:20-22 God gets angry and mercilessly torments and kills everyone, young and old. He even causes women to eat their children. Child abuse: Genesis 22:9 & 10 “And they came to the place which God had told him of and Abraham built an altar there, and laid the wood in order, and bound Isaac his son, and laid him on the altar upon the wood. And Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the knife to slay his son.” It matters not that god let Abraham get out of murdering Isaac.

To put a knife up to your son’s throat is child abuse.

Abraham, our patriarch. What a loser. I fI start hearing voices and want to put a knife to my kid, please, lock me up, and a quick gignatic dose of Thorazine.

Seriously, were the jokers that wrote this crap on drugs?

I Kings 3:24-25 “And the king said, Bring me a sword. And they brought a sword before the king. And the king said, Divide the living child in two, and give half to the one, and half to the other.” This test was of course given to see who the real mother of the child was. Christians view this king as a wise man. I look upon his suggestion with far more revulsion then I give accredit to Susan Smith. Proverbs 13:24, 19:18, 22:15, 23:13-14 & 29:15 God commands repeatedly that you beat your children. Matthew 19:29 If you really loved Jesus then he insists that you abandon your wife and children for him. Only that way will he allow you to go to heaven. (That is if you meet his other hefty requirements, don’t slip through the loopholes, and ignore the contradictions.) Mark 7:9 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not killing their disobedient children according to Old Testament law.

In Summary I end this list with a verse that should keep the pro lifers in check ( but won’t, you can’t persuade imbeciles even with overwhelming fact ass we have seen over and over again on this site.). It is Romans 13: 1-7 “Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which god has established. The authorities that exist have been established by god. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what god has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he shall commend you. For he is god’s servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is god’s servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. There fore it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience.

This is also why we pay taxes, for the authorities are god’s servants, who give their full time to governing. Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes, if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.” Clearly it is the job of Christians to obey the laws, and the laws of this country clearly state that abortion is legal. So too should Christians respect and honor that law. God commands them to NOT disobey, which entails attempting to get the law overturned. If god wanted abortion to be illegal he wouldn’t have appointed authorities to make it legal.

 

November 16, 2008

Hysterectomy, surgical removal of the womb

Posted by Elena Carvin under Abortion, CA-125, CA125, Cancer, Cervical, Ovarian, SupraCervical | Tags: , , , , , , , , , |
[17] Comments 

Hysterectomy, the surgical removal of the womb, remains one of the most common procedures performed in the United States. The most common indications are bleeding, discomfort – pressure – pain, or fibroid tumors and rarely cancer.

hysterectomyOver the years the indications for hysterectomy have dropped precipitously. Yet older doctors still perform the procedure routinely, when other options are available.

Please get a second opinion if oyu are considering a hysterectomy.

Fibroid tumors are very common, most do not need removal, they are seen routinely on ultrasound and they are completely without symptoms, and may be left alone, or watched on some periodic basis with the simple ultrasound test. The ultrasound test has few downsides, most being, the cost and the inconvenience of the minor discomfort.

Tests such as doppler velocimetry, or CA-125 (made famous by Gilda Radner, can be used as screening tools along with ultrasound for Ovarian cancer.

There are vaginal hysterectomies, morcillated hysterectomies of many types, one’s done through the abdominal incision, a vertical, or a bikini cut. Many surgeons have good experience with laparoscopic or robot assisted laparoscopic hysterectomies.

Please ask if your surgeon is board certified.

In some cases, like cervical cancer a Radical Hysterectomy needs to be done, and if you are pregnant this is also a form of abortion. Ask about this.

Theoretically, Mifepristone for Abortion or RU486 for Abortion could be used prior to the procedure.

Or even Robot assisted laparoscopic vaginal hysterectomies!

Confusing. Educate yourself.

Ask:

1) Does your cervix need to be taken out?

Do you need a SupraCervical Hysterectomy?
A Total Hysterectomy?
Total Hysterectomy and Bilateral SalpingoOophorectomy?
The nomenclature can be confusing.
2) Do your ovaries need to be taken out. Some women as they approach menopause, this may not be a bad idea.

 

« Previous Page — Next Page »