i do not sway killing children is wrong killin unborn children is wrong

The images of the aftermath of an abortion? Faked using miscarriages and stillbirths by the anti-abortion brigade.

If anyone had such disregard for me - well, I would neither know nor care, nor would I, prior to 22 weeks of fetal development, been able to feel pain. Ergo, the "unborn child" does not suffer. At all.

Well, I apologize if I forgot to exactly word every bit of it, and that some ppl are just oblivious to some things. So, in the that case, let me rephrase... "if a woman has sex, she either gets pregnant or catches an std, then she has to take responsiblity for having sex... if nothing comes of having sex except an orgasm, what does she have to take responsibility for??? Nothing, except for having sex out of wedlock, more than likely. Then she'll have to face god when her time for judgement comes.

Future, lol NOT EVERY WOMAN THAT HAS HAD SEX AND GOT PREGNANT HAS HAD A MISCARRIAGE. I DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU THINK YOUR GETTING THAT "FACT" FROM, BUT U DON'T NEED TO TRUST THE SOURCE WHERE YOU READ OR HEARD THAT... I HAVE NEVER HAD A MISCARRIAGE, AND I HAVE HAD SEX WITH THE GUY I WAS WITH AT THE TIME. Now, every woman that has sex takes the CHANCE of getting pregnant, and having a miscarriage. You wrong on this statement though.

The President’s Council on Bioethics

John M. Opitz, M.D.,
Professor of Pediatrics, Human Genetics, and Obstetrics/Gynecology, School of Medicine, University of Utah.

It is estimated by multiple sources and authors and has been for decades that at the very beginning of life, of human development, of conception, about 50 percent of all potential human beings have a chromosome abnormality, mostly a lethal chromosome abnormality. Chromosome abnormalities are the commonest cause of death in humans. They kill at the very minimum two-thirds of potential humans, more likely 80 to 90 percent and they mostly do so through these lethal aneuploidies.

PROF. SANDEL: Thank you. I have two questions about the rate of natural embryo loss in human beings. The first is what percent of fertilized eggs fail to implant or are otherwise lost? And the second question is is it the case that all of these lost embryos contain genetic defects that would have prevented their normal development and birth?

DR. OPITZ: The answer to your first question is that it is enormous. Estimates range all the way from 60 percent to 80 percent of the very earliest stages, cleavage stages, for example, that are lost.

PROF. SANDEL: Sixty to 80 percent?

DR. OPITZ: Sixty to 80 percent. And one of the objective ways of establishing the loss at least as of the moment of implantation, well, even earlier, let's say as of five days because the blastocyst begins to make a chorionic gonadotrophin and with extremely sensitive assay methods, you can detect the presence of gonadotrophins, let me say, first around Day 7. That's the beta of human chorionic gonadotrophin. And if you follow prospectively the cycles that has been done on quite a few occasions in the Permanente study in Hawaii and so on, a group of women, of nonfertility, who want to conceive and you detect the first sign of pregnancy there of human chorionic gonadotrophin, about 60 percent of those pregnancies are lost.

It is independently corroborated by the fact that the monozygotic twin conception rate at the very beginning is much, much higher than the birth rate and then if you follow with amniocentesis, the presence of the two sacs in about 80 percent of cases,the second sac disappears, one of the sacs disappears.

CHAIRMAN KASS: The 60 percent then would be of those that have at least reached the 7 days so that you could trace the – so there might be even greater loss at the early cleavage stage, is that correct?

DR. OPITZ: That's correct. And the earlier the stage of loss, the greater the rate of aneuploidy. There exists sort of a standard, textbook formula whereby 60 percent of spontaneous abortions have a chromosome abnormality. Six percent of all stillbirths and 6/10ths percent of all live born children. Now the latter figure is probably closer to 1 percent if you include some growth variants. So that's sort of a rule of thumb.

In my own lab in Helena where I did all of the autopsies on all pregnancy losses for 18 years, the rate of chromosome abnormalities was a little bit higher.

PROF. SANDEL: So if we take the 7-day stage, it's 60 percent. The 80 percent is if you go back to the moment of fertilization. But if you take just starting at the 7 days, there's 60 percent rate of natural loss. And of those 60 percent that are lost from the 7-day stage, what percentage of those have abnormalities or defects such that they wouldn't otherwise be able to be born?

DR. OPITZ: I would say somewhere around 50 to 60 percent and mind you, many of these are empty sacs, tiny, tiny stunted little embryos, but when you culture the sacs you find a chromosome abnormality, even though the embryo has vanished already.

PROF. SANDEL: So of the 60 percent that are lost at the 7-day stage, 40 to 50 percent did not contain defects or abnormalities, could have been born?

DR. OPITZ: Right.

PROF. SANDEL: And become babies.
http://www.bioethics.gov/transcripts/jan03/session1.html

honestly, its offensive that someone would refer to living beings as poptarts. especially an unborn child.

further, its a shame that someone could refer to a living being as though their just disposable. have you ever seen images of the aftermath of an abortion?

the way they perform them are incredibly in humane. we just treat these innocent unborn children, like they dont have a right to life.

in my experience, its not only the unborn child that suffers as a result of abortion, but the mother as well. i cant speak for all women, but i met more than one that lives in regret about the decision to go through with it. abortion is a permanent decision. i think that abstinence or birth control arent practiced enough. why not adoption?
i mean, what if someone had such dis regard for you, when you were in your moms belly. you wouldnt even exist today.

Ps I know this thread isnt about abortion per say. but, you did mention it as an option for ending an accidental pregnacy. so the previous is my opinion about abortion being an option...

So many single mothers explain their circumstances as the result of an accident. They got pregnant by accident. But accidental pregnancy doesn't mean a birth has to follow. Children born in these situations were not accidents, they were freely chosen by their birth mothers. Just becoming pregnant does not force any woman to give birth. Abortion has been legal for decades now. And adoption is also a viable alternative.

The point is, all children are here because of the conscious choice of the mother. No one has to continue an accidental pregnancy. These women have children because they want to.

i cant speak for all women, but i met more than one that lives in regret about the decision to go through with it. abortion is a permanent decision.

asock, is here because he is bored while his kids are at his mom's? Then why the h ell isn't he over at his mom's with the kids?

Future, notice the percentage... its NOT 100%.... not every single woman has had it happened.

If an egg was fertilized and didn't "latch" to the uterus like it should, to me, in MY OPINION, the woman wasn't prego to begin with. Now if it did, and it came loose, then it is a miscarriage. I knw it seems unfair for women who don't get prego or stds to not have to take responsibility, but then again life isn't fair either...

well, you gave your opinion and like wise i can give mine, regardless of how many times its been posted. thats why they created these forums right? right.

why would someone go out of their way to re assemble miscarried babies, to present an apparent "delusion" of what abortion is. is that a fact, i mean really? that sounds ridiculous.

i saw a picture of a 2nd tri baby, with its head seperated from its body, you dont think that baby suffered? it occurs in such small numbers? wow, its incredible, that the fact that it occured at all wouldnt bother you. these are babies were talking about.

anyway, this is my opinion. and obviously, if your mom chose to terminate you, you wouldnt be here to give yours. dont you enjoy being alive? i sure do. i have hopes and dreams and id like to think i have a purpose. i believe the same for those babies that are killed everyday

Well i believe that with all actions come consequences and is it now LEGAL TO MURDER??????????????????????????????????????????

asock as you call me has had the kids day and night for 3 weeks now, asock finally got a break

Hey, you were the one going on and on about "taking responsibility," right? So, why does someone else have to take responsibility now?

Are you going somewhere with this? If you're implying that abortion is murder, then no, you're wrong. A fetus is not a person, and an embryo is not a person. Therefore it is still not legal to murder, no matter how you try to reframe the debate

then in my eyes according to your logic, if you punch a pregnant woman in the stomache, while she is carrying you will not be charged with murder if she loses the baby only simple assult. interesting you should be a defense lawyer

There is no way for a doctor to determine if you were pregnant after your hCG level has reached 0, and in the case of chemical pregnancies, hCG is usually not produced at all. They can, however, logically assume missed periods that cannot be explained by diet, exercise, stress or medications in a sexually active woman are more than likely caused by a chemical pregnancy. They cannot say for certain because not every woman is running to the bathroom to pee on a stick when her period is due.

Women who say that a doctor can tell they were pregnant after a chemical pregnancy or completed miscarriage before a period is missed or a few days late are the same ones that lie to their boyfriends about being pregnant and/or trick them into getting them pregnant. Without the presence of hCG ( some offices >5, others >1) in your blood they cannot tell if you are or were ever pregnant for that short a time period.

It is independently corroborated by the fact that the monozygotic twin conception rate at the very beginning is much, much higher than the birth rate and then if you follow with amniocentesis, the presence of the two sacs in about 80 percent of cases,the second sac disappears, one of the sacs disappears.

CHAIRMAN KASS: The 60 percent then would be of those that have at least reached the 7 days so that you could trace the – so there might be even greater loss at the early cleavage stage, is that correct?

DR. OPITZ: That's correct. And the earlier the stage of loss, the greater the rate of aneuploidy. There exists sort of a standard, textbook formula whereby 60 percent of spontaneous abortions have a chromosome abnormality. Six percent of all stillbirths and 6/10ths percent of all live born children. Now the latter figure is probably closer to 1 percent if you include some growth variants. So that's sort of a rule of thumb.

In my own lab in Helena where I did all of the autopsies on all pregnancy losses for 18 years, the rate of chromosome abnormalities was a little bit higher.

http://www.bioethics.gov/transcripts/jan03/session1.html

Anytime after the 5th month of pregnancy the law, according to some local lawyers I have talked to b4, sees the fetus as human. So therfore can be charged for murder if the baby doesn't make it to birth. It all depends on where u live.

You are right that doctors cannot tell if you are pregnant, etc., but that is not how it was determined that so many embryos were dying before birth. It was scientific research over many, many years in which women who were trying to conceive were watched carefully, their periods were "autopsied" to see if an embryo, (whatever stage after fertilization) was there.