We left the window open....................

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 9:36 am

Accountable;835419 wrote: I just want people to realize there's no difference - none at all - between abortion and leaving a child with the window open.

Acc, you're certainly entitled to that...but not everyone will agree.

It was also a common practice for doctors a century or two ago to smother infants who came out not right. Such as anencephalic babies and those with body parts on the outside, etc. It was thought then that the doctor knew best and it was considered again, the kind thing to do.

Remembering that as recently as the early 1900s, it was not unheard of for families to keep their "wrong" child in a basement or attic for its entire life, rather than let the public know it existed. I personally think I'd rather be dead than live a life like that.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 10:21 am

along-for-the-ride · Post by **along-for-the-ride** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 11:03 am

Accountable;835419 wrote: I just want people to realize there's no difference - none at all - between abortion and leaving a child with the window open.

The other options ofcourse are abstinance and birth control.

I'm not going to judge these occurances. I just acknowledge that they do and did happen. These "ladies who left the window open" will live with this the rest of their lives....perhaps in relief, perhaps in regret. "Leaving that window open"..was that an easy thing to do, or a hard thing to do?

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 5:11 pm

It's a sad and backward world we live in, when it is actually a question of debate whether to even try.

cars · Post by **cars** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 5:54 pm

Accountable;835419 wrote: I just want people to realize there's no difference - none at all - between abortion and leaving a child with the window open.
Actually in fact, there is a vast difference. Abortion terminates an unborn, unknown baby that can turn out to be absolutely healthy. While the rational for "leaving a child with the window open", is geared towards terminating a known quantity.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 6:22 pm

cars;835749 wrote: Actually in fact, there is a vast difference. Abortion terminates an unborn, unknown baby that can turn out to be absolutely healthy. While the rational for "leaving a child with the window open", is geared towards terminating a known quantity.
That makes the former sound dumber and latter sound more sinister, but the result is the same.

suzy_creamcheese · Post by **suzy_creamcheese** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 1:35 am

in places/times where there just isnt the facilities to look after a child with many disablities then i dont see euthanasia as such a terrible thing. I see it as probably a necessary evil. I dont think there would have been many people desperate to leave the window open for their babies. They were probably devastated, but what choice did they have back then? Its all very well to condemn when youre looking at it from an incredibly priveleged position.

mikeinie · Post by **mikeinie** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 1:37 am

Accountable;835140 wrote: Killing babies. I find it amazing that most of the outraged people in this thread would be saying "So what?" if these Chinese people had abortions rather than killing after the child took breath.

So really what we're outraged about is the procrastination.

If the second pregnancy is known officially in China, then the woman will be brought in and given a forced abortion.

I canâ€™t believe how this thread has digressed to a debate between abortion and this topic. I donâ€™t understand the way some of you think. . Leaving a child to die because of what, minor illnesses or something as little as being deaf is horrible and has nothing to do with the abortion issue.

jennyswan · Post by **jennyswan** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 2:57 am

suzy_creamcheese;835862 wrote: in places/times where there just isnt the facilities to look after a child with many disablities then i dont see euthanasia as such a terrible thing. I see it as probably a necessary evil. I dont think there would have been many people desperate to leave the window open for their babies. They were probably devastated, but what choice did they have back then? Its all very well to condemn when youre looking at it from an incredibly priveleged position.

Let me just express that Euthanasia is a choice that can be made by the individual, the person being murdered does not have a choice about it. There is a huge difference.

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 3:11 am

mikeinie;835864 wrote: If the second pregnancy is known officially in China, then the woman will be brought in and given a forced abortion.

I canâ€™t believe how this thread has digressed to a debate between abortion and this topic. I donâ€™t understand the way some of you think. . Leaving a child to die because of what, minor illnesses or something as little as being deaf is horrible and has nothing to do with the abortion issue.

Who said anything about minor illnesses and deafness? No one even knows an infant is deaf when it's newly born, that I am aware of. According to historical accounts I have read (and I've never heard of leaving a window open but rather smothering and such by doctors and midwives) the practice was used for severely deformed infants, such as babies born without brains or their spines open, or body parts on the outside or such awful things. I put weight into intent. The intent was to let the baby go without suffering. Surely waiting for nature to take its course would have been a form of suffering?

suzy_creamcheese · Post by **suzy_creamcheese** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 3:20 am

its just semantics

I just think its all very well calling it murder, but we are lucky enough to live in a society with facilities in place, medical advances so that caring for severely disabled people is an option if we wish to do so.

Even if you would judge someone nowadays for not keeping a severely disabled child, at least see that back then it probably wasnt an option at all, and it was more likely a case of having the death over and done with quickly, or having it long and drawn out.

Like youd put a lame horse humanely out of its misery, or an animal that was severely ill with no hope of recovering - its a horrible thought, but im sure in those days it was about stopping suffering, and tbh, I think there are probably cases now where it would be kinder to just let the little one die than artifically prolong life (remember the baby charlotte case?) Sometimes people are too hung up on preserving life at any cost, rather than actual quality of life once theyre there

jennyswan · Post by **jennyswan** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 3:24 am

RedGlitter;835891 wrote: Who said anything about minor illnesses and deafness? No one even knows an infant is deaf when it's newly born, that I am aware of. According to historical accounts I have read (and I've never heard of leaving a window open but rather smothering and such by doctors and midwives) the practice was used for severely deformed infants, such as babies born without brains or their spines open, or body parts on the outside or such awful things. I put weight into intent. The intent was to let the baby go without suffering. Surely waiting for nature to take its course would have been a form of suffering?

Hi Red, I'd like to make a point here and this is more from my own spiritual viewpoint so it's not an arguement as such. I would just like to say that maybe that it is their life lesson for that particular life to suffer or to be born with a defect and I just think (personally) no human on this earth has the right to decide about the life of another no matter what the reason. I think we then are making ourselves equal to God and from a spiritual stand point I can't agree with this in any way. I agree that maybe when you're in the situation it's a total different kettle of fish. I hope that I have learned in my life not to judge others and to respect others opinions but I just can't seem to get over the idea that it is another life we're talking about.

pantsonfire321@aol.com · Sun Apr 13, 2008 3:51 am

I agree this is a highly emotive subject( and my comments are not aimed at any one person) but instead of accusing every single parent in the world who has ever had a termination of being a murderer (and thats what you are doing, calling women murderers) it might be better to start by making the world a better place to bring up a child with severe abnormalities .

How many kids are left in care at this moment in time ...can you imagine what the world would be like if abortion were illegal world wide . Believe me, no woman makes this decision lightly....you could not imagine what it's like to be told your baby has abnormalities and i have no doubt there are quite a few members here that have had terminations and live with the heartache every day .:-5

jennyswan · Post by **jennyswan** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 3:56 am

pantsonfire321@aol.com;835925 wrote: I agree this is a highly emotive subject( and my comments are not aimed at any one person) but instead of accusing every single parent in the world who has ever had a termination of being a murderer (and thats what you are doing, calling women murderers) it might be better to start by making the world a better place to bring up a child with severe abnormalities .

How many kids are left in care at this moment in time ...can you imagine what the world would be like if abortion were illegal world wide . Believe me, no woman makes this decision lightly....you could not imagine what it's like to be told your baby has abnormalities and i have no doubt there are quite a few members here that have had terminations and live with the heartache every day .:-5

I imagine there are Pants and you're right it's a topic people will never agree on. I've made my point. I'm just going to leave it be now.

suzy_creamcheese · Post by **suzy_creamcheese** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 4:07 am

I think this is just a whole load of different issues been brought into one topic, with the only factor in common being babies.

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 4:17 am

suzy_creamcheese;835899 wrote: [Big Snip] Sometimes people are too hung up on preserving life at any cost, rather than actual quality of life once theyre there

Hi and welcome back, SuzyCC. I agree very much especially with this part of your comment. I think if you're a parent you have to do what you think is right for your child and at one time, that probably meant "leaving the window open." It's all human decisions, human error and we're all different in our ideas so naturally there's going to be dissent over something like this. Some will think I'm way off for suggesting that letting one's kid die is the best a parent can do. And that's fine. But I think it is the parent's decision when we're talking about serious defects that would render the kid having a poor quality life.

jennyswan;835902 wrote: Hi Red, I'd like to make a point here and this is more from my own spiritual viewpoint so it's not an arguement as such.[Big Snip]

Hi JennySwan, not to worry, I didn't take your comments as an argument. I hope you haven't taken mine that way either. We don't really agree on this issue, but you are very good at getting your thoughts across and I do understand where it is you're coming from. I respect your viewpoint.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 4:39 am

What people did in the past they did for their own reasons. My posts are about what's happening now. Reading back I did it clumsily; sorry. I'm simply pointing out that this practice of killing an infant for whatever reason is no more or less outrageous than having an abortion. Mike, I can't believe you really can't see that.

The decision to terminate a pregnancy (call it what you want, Pants, I'm trying to stay civil) must be heartrending -- more so when faced with the fact that it is not only unnecessary (danger to the woman's life excepted), but that it may be denying the family, an adoptive family, or possibly the world with a priceless gift.

Here is a link to famous people who were born with spina bifida, a condition detectable with a blood test that I'm sure some women will use as reason to abort. To the right of the list are more links of famous people born with other conditions.

Every life deserves a chance, poor quality or not.

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 4:51 am

We're very far apart on this, Acc. But we knew this, right? I understand what you are saying. And I'm not trying to change your mind (or anyone's mind) just saying that I don't make a comparison between abortion and the other.

I also understand what you're saying about life quality and other alternatives but I take the other viewpoint. I hope this won't come out offensive because I don't mean it as such, but I think it's actually selfish to let a child have a poor quality of life. I'm talking really poor, not just a minor defect. I don't see ending that child's life to be any kind of theft from the world. Indeed I don't feel any parent owes the world a child.

I do understand though and as I said to JennySwan, I do respect your opinion.

suzy_creamcheese · Post by **suzy_creamcheese** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 5:04 am

i cant see the comparison either tbh, but then again, I dont think abortion is wrong, and i can understand why infanticide in the olden days would have happened and dont think you could compare it to infanticide now.

I think youre just so desperate to slate people whove had terminations that youll even bring it into a thread about something thats a seperate issue

pantsonfire321@aol.com · Sun Apr 13, 2008 5:09 am

Accountable;835953 wrote: What people did in the past they did for their own reasons. My posts are about what's happening now. Reading back I did it clumsily; sorry. I'm simply pointing out that this practice of killing an infant for whatever reason is no more or less outrageous than having an abortion. Mike, I can't believe you really can't see that.

The decision to terminate a pregnancy (call it what you want, Pants, I'm trying to stay civil) must be heartrending -- more so when faced with the fact that it is not only unnecessary (danger to the woman's life excepted), but that it may be denying the family, an adoptive family, or possibly the world with a priceless gift.

Here is a link to famous people who were born with spina bifida, a condition detectable with a blood test that I'm sure some women will use as reason to abort. To the right of the list are more links of famous people born with other conditions.

Every life deserves a chance, poor quality or not.

And the other end of the scale is a person living on sink council esate and living on benefits and struggling to bring up that child against the odds on very little money and battling discrimination . Not everyone goes on to achieve greatness .

I don't think that this is a topic that people will ever agree on but to take away a womans choice would be a terrible thing .

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 5:12 am

RedGlitter;835958 wrote: We're very far apart on this, Acc. But we knew this, right? I understand what you are saying. And I'm not trying to change your mind (or anyone's mind) just saying that I don't make a comparison between abortion and the other.

I also understand what you're saying about life quality and other alternatives but I take the other viewpoint. I hope this won't come out offensive because I don't mean it as such, but I think it's actually selfish to let a child have a poor quality of life. I'm talking really poor, not just a minor defect. I don't see ending that child's life to be any kind of theft from the world. Indeed I don't feel any parent owes the world a child.

I do understand though and as I said to JennySwan, I do respect your opinion.
For a long time it bugged me that you were so consitent in some ways then inconsistent in others. I knew it was just that I wasn't seeing the consistency. Then it hit me: rather than seeing dogs (animals) as equal to humans, it's more that humans are equal to dogs. I tried to figure a better way to phrase it, and don't mean it offensively in any way. It just fits. When I replace any human reference in your posts with a dog reference, it makes perfect sense.

This allows me to see that you really are a sensitive and compassionate person, Red. Yeh we completely disagree on some things, but we come from the same place, and have similar goals. :-6

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 5:17 am

pantsonfire321@aol.com;835970 wrote: And the other end of the scale is a person living on sink council esate and living on benefits and struggling to bring up that child against the odds on very little money and battling discrimination . Not everyone goes on to achieve greatness .Yes, they do, they just don't achieve fame or riches. I'll tell you about how great my students are sometime. :-6

As for the struggling mother --- adoption

pantsonfire321@aol.com wrote: I don't think that this is a topic that people will ever agree on but to take away a womans choice would be a terrible thing .
I never argued that. I just wish they would make the choice to not have sex unless they're ready to be parents (that goes for both sexes). And I wish they would make the choice to honor the life their consentual sex created rather than destroy it.

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 5:22 am

Accountable;835972 wrote: For a long time it bugged me that you were so consitent in some ways then inconsistent in others. I knew it was just that I wasn't seeing the consistency. Then it hit me: rather than seeing dogs (animals) as equal to humans, it's more that humans are equal to dogs. I tried to figure a better way to phrase it, and don't mean it offensively in any way. It just fits. When I replace any human reference in your posts with a dog reference, it makes perfect sense.

This allows me to see that you really are a sensitive and compassionate person, Red. Yeh we completely disagree on some things, but we come from the same place, and have similar goals. :-6

Thank you, Acc.

Believe me, that means a lot to me coming from you. :-6

pantsonfire321@aol.com · Sun Apr 13, 2008 5:34 am

Accountable;835978 wrote: Yes, they do, they just don't achieve fame or riches. I'll tell you about how great my students are sometime. :-6

As for the struggling mother --- adoption

I never argued that. I just wish they would make the choice to not have sex unless they're ready to be parents (that goes for both sexes). And I wish they would make the choice to honor the life their consentual sex created rather than destroy it.

Please don't take this the wrong way:o Teaching children and being a parent are completely different things .

I tryed to say this earier but didn't do a very good job and i apologise if this time i don't do any better

Its all very well to say continue the pregnancy and then give the child up for a adoption but we have thousands of children (able bodied and disabled ) waiting and longing to live in loving homes by people who will love and cherish them ...their just isn't enough people to go around. Maybe if every single one of them had homes and we had enough people to then take on the disabled children then maybe what your saying (ban abortion all together) could work .

If you did ban abortion it would just mean thousands if not millions of more children would live their lives in care homes ... with no body caring .....i just don't see how your way is any fairer .

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 7:50 am

pantsonfire321@aol.com;835991 wrote: Please don't take this the wrong way:o Teaching children and being a parent are completely different things .

I tryed to say this earier but didn't do a very good job and i apologise if this time i don't do any better

:yh_youkid I'd never presume to take credit for them. I've only been with them a few months. They are all major challenges. Most of my students are foster kids living in a children's home. The parents of the others say they're at the end of their ropes but still wouldn't consider abandoning them. Still, I don't think any of them would want to be put out of their misery. Indeed, when one does come along with suicidal tendencies, we do our very best to turn them around. We'd be considered cruel otherwise.

pantsonfire321@aol.com wrote: Its all very well to say continue the pregnancy and then give the child up for a adoption but we have thousands of children (able bodies and disabled ) waiting and longing to live in loving homes by people who will love and cherish them ...their just isn't enough people to go around. Maybe if every single one of them had homes and we had enough people to then take on the disabled children then maybe what your saying (ban abortion all together) could work .

If you did ban abortion it would just mean thousands if not millions of more children would live their lives in care homes ... with no body caring .....i just don't see how your way is any fairer . So death is fairer? How so?

what your saying (ban abortion all together)

I've got over 17 thousand posts in this forum. I've always tried to be consistent and honest. Show me one time where I said that. You seem to be filtering my words to fit your prejudice.

pantsonfire321@aol.com · Sun Apr 13, 2008 9:20 am

Accountable;836054 wrote: :yh_youkid I'd never presume to take credit for them. I've only been with them a few months. They are all major challenges. Most of my students are foster kids living in a children's home. The parents of the others say they're at the end of their ropes but still wouldn't consider abandoning them. Still, I don't think any of them would want to be put out of their misery. Indeed, when one does come along with suicidal tendencies, we do our very best to turn them around. We'd be considered cruel otherwise.

So death is fairer? How so?

COLOR=#ff00ff]

I've got over 17 thousand posts in this forum. I've always tried to be consistent and honest. Show me one time where I said that. You seem to be filtering my words to fit your prejudice.

How am i prejudice, if anything i would say you are by calling women who have terminations Murderers

look i'm not really disagreeing with you, i'm just trying to say its not always that clean cut . My own personal experiance has taught me that i too don't really like abortion . I just believe thats whats more important is giving people an option .

Institutions are not always the answer . I had a school friend once who ended up in the system and was horribly abused ...theres not always a happy ending .

We all have to live with the choices we make in life and some choices are harder to live with than others. I saved my child from a life time of pain and thats good enough for me . I really don't need anyone elses forgiveness.:-5

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 9:36 am

pantsonfire321@aol.com;836135 wrote: How am i prejudice,
By having decided (judged) that I support "ban abortion all together" before (pre) finding any time that I have posted it.

In fact, if you'd care to take the time to check, I have often supported freedom of choice ... even as recent as this very thread.

mikeinie · Post by **mikeinie** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 10:03 am

Accountable;835953 wrote: What people did in the past they did for their own reasons. My posts are about what's happening now. Reading back I did it clumsily; sorry. I'm simply pointing out that this practice of killing an infant for whatever reason is no more or less outrageous than having an abortion. Mike, I can't believe you really can't see that.

The decision to terminate a pregnancy (call it what you want, Pants, I'm trying to stay civil) must be heartrending -- more so when faced with the fact that it is not only unnecessary (danger to the woman's life excepted), but that it may be denying the family, an adoptive family, or possibly the world with a priceless gift.

Here is a link to famous people who were born with spina bifida, a condition detectable with a blood test that I'm sure some women will use as reason to abort. To the right of the list are more links of famous people born with other conditions.

Every life deserves a chance, poor quality or not.

I think that we are in agreement here, not against each other Not sure where I miss led.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 10:31 am

mikeinie;836184 wrote: I think that we are in agreement here, not against each other Not sure where I miss led.
Oh. Good! I brought abortion into this thread, so I thought you were referring to my post(s). My bad.

pantsonfire321@aol.com · Sun Apr 13, 2008 7:35 pm

jimbo;836340 wrote: my friend has a very disabled 30 year old sister she lives alone in a bungalow thats specially kitted out for her ,my friend and a carer take very good care of her , she is a wonderful funny kind caring great person ,she leads a great life she goes out in her special car and has loads of friends i really like her and admire her ,any one that ever met her not fail to be absolutely amazed by her any one that met her would not think for one second she would be better off dead

Good for her .

But i'm sure it would have been a completely different story had the family not had help (the burden been on them to support and pay for everything for this poor woman her whole life ) if the council and not given her and kitted out the Bungalow. People in this country are very lucky they have the state to give them every thing . Thats the point, people have abortions for all different reasons some simply use it as a form of contraception . The general feeling here was that all women who terminate (for what ever reason ) the termination equalled murder .

*************

By having decided (judged) that I support "ban abortion all together" before (pre) finding any time that I have posted it.

In fact, if you'd care to take the time to check, I have often supported freedom of choice ... even as recent as this very thread.

Acc i'm sorry if i've jumped to conclusions. . I thought you did completely disagree with abortions . Can i ask you what you do agree with and what you don't.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Mon Apr 14, 2008 3:22 am

pantsonfire321@aol.com;836423 wrote: Acc i'm sorry if i've jumped to conclusions. . I thought you did completely disagree with abortions . Can i ask you what you do agree with and what you don't.
I do disagree with abortion, but that doesn't mean I automatically call for a ban. There are lots of things I find stupid or cruel or dangerous that I think people shouldn't do.

I do a couple of them. But "shouldn't" doesn't equate to "shouldn't be allowed to" in my mind. I live by my sig, I Choose Freedom, Warts and All.

As mean as it sounds, I'm glad it was a difficult decision to kill your child. It should be torture. That way maybe you won't be quick to have another. You're reasons are yours and I support your right to make the decision, but don't expect me to support the decision itself. I don't

I will continue to speak out against that which we label with the euphemism "abortion". As I've said several times in this Garden, I wish for two things when it comes to this subject:

1) That children would be granted citizenship upon conception.

2) That medical science will find a way to transplant a fetus so that we can take a baby from the woman who doesn't want to be pregnant to the mother who can't otherwise become pregnant.

pantsonfire321@aol.com · Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:44 am

Acc, i don't want to put words into your mouth so i'll ask you out right ( if thats ok) .

So in what instance would you support Abortion . You've already said you don't agree with abortion for medicle reasons (ie the child has a deformity) so how do you feel about Rape????

And how would you change things (if you could) i guess short of stoping people having unprotected sex there will always be a need for it .

*** lets remember this is not a debate about whether we like or dislike disabled people (as some are trying to turn this into) it's about the choices people make and the choices people had to make all those years ago .

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Tue Apr 15, 2008 3:06 am

pantsonfire321@aol.com;837490 wrote: Acc, i don't want to put words into your mouth so i'll ask you out right ( if thats ok) .

So in what instance would you support Abortion . You've already said you don't agree with abortion for medicle reasons (ie the child has a deformity) so how do you feel about Rape????

And how would you change things (if you could) i guess short of stoping people having unprotected sex there will always be a need for it .

I prefer to be asked outright, actually. Doesn't matter what the subject is. It helps avoid misunderstandings.

To be as clear as I can be: I don't "agree" with or support abortion - not under any circumstances, not ever. I can understand why someone would get an abortion and under the right circumstances I might empathize, but don't ask me for a loan or a ride to get one.

That does not mean I support a legal ban! I prefer that people CHOOSE to do the right thing. Adults make adult decisions and live with the consequences.

I believe humans beings are human beings from the start, and drawing polluted air into new lungs does not bestow special powers. Therefore, I would support granting a person citizen status upon conception, with all the rights of a citizen. That would give them legal right to life and make this abortion debate moot. I will be glad to discuss this further, but not in this thread. We've pulled it far enough off topic.pantsonfire321@aol.com wrote:

*** lets remember this is not a debate about whether we like or dislike disabled people (as some are trying to turn this into) it's about the choices people make and the choices people had to make all thoses years ago .
Right.

I've liked every disabled person I've ever met. I have no opinion of the choices people made out of ignorance 100 years ago.

pantsonfire321@aol.com · Tue Apr 15, 2008 3:17 am

Accountable;837498 wrote: I prefer to be asked outright, actually. Doesn't matter what the subject is. It helps avoid misunderstandings.

To be as clear as I can be: I don't "agree" with or support abortion - not under any circumstances, not ever. I can understand why someone would get an abortion and under the right circumstances I might empathize, but don't ask me for a loan or a ride to get one.

That does not mean I support a legal ban! I prefer that people CHOOSE to do the right thing. Adults make adult decisions and live with the consequences.

I believe humans beings are human beings from the start, and drawing polluted air into new lungs does not bestow special powers. Therefore, I would support granting a person citizen status upon conception, with all the rights of a citizen. That would give them legal right to life and make this abortion debate moot. I will be glad to discuss this further, but not in this thread. We've pulled it far enough off topic.

Right.

I've liked every disabled person I've ever met. I have no opinion of the choices people made out of ignorance 100 years ago.

The last bit wasn't about you, however i would agree with you there... i haven't met anyone who was disabled that i didn't like .

Hope6 · Post by **Hope6** » Tue Apr 15, 2008 3:44 am

okay let me say first that i don't believe in abortion either.

after trying for 13 years to unsuccessfully have a child, including one miscarriage i finally discovered i was pregnant. I was a high risk pregnancy because of my age and the chances of birth defects were also higher. When the doctors asked what tests i wanted performed to check for defects i said none of them!

this was my miracle from God and i was not getting rid of it no matter what might be wrong. The doctors agreed, they said if you're not planning to act on the results, there's no reason to have the tests and then have something to worry about until the baby is born!

i was positive nothing was wrong, somehow i just knew it so it didn't worry me at all, and i was right he's now a perfectly healthy 21-month old.

but as his mother i would have loved him and cared for him no matter what might have been wrong.

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Tue Apr 15, 2008 4:28 am

Since we're dealing with infallible humans here, humans are responsible for the welfare of their child. For some humans, that means terminating its life before its born or shortly after it is born (some of you prefer the word "kill") and I know I'm not in a position to call those people out for what they do. That is what they feel is best for their child. I know there are certain illnesses which if my child had one of them, I would prefer it die rather than endure a hellish life. I don't think this makes me a bad person or warrants me eternal life in hell.

I'm glad we can get off the abortion issue now. Thanks.

suzy_creamcheese · Post by **suzy_creamcheese** » Tue Apr 15, 2008 5:22 am

RedGlitter;837522 wrote: Since we're dealing with infallible humans here, humans are responsible for the welfare of their child. For some humans, that means terminating its life before its born or shortly after it is born (some of you prefer the word "kill") and I know I'm not in a position to call those people out for what they do. That is what they feel is best for their child. I know there are certain illnesses which if my child had one of them, I would prefer it die rather than endure a hellish life. I don't think this makes me a bad person or warrants me eternal life in hell.

I'm glad we can get off the abortion issue now. Thanks.

me too.

On a baby website i visit there is a woman there who had a very premature baby with all sorts of problems. She is in constant pain, she is nearly blind, deaf, aspirates everything that she eats into her lungs, there is nothing that can be done, she will never have an independant life. Even my partner who has always been pro-life has said it will be a blessing when that poor baby finally gives up

There was also someone very recently on the same board who has had a termination as her baby had one of the major trisomy disorders, usually incompatible with life - if the baby was to survive birth, it would likely be for only a very short time.

Shes absolutely devastated, and its only her other child that keeps her from doing something terrible to herself, but its so nice to know that some would say that its a good thing that she is going through such trauma "as it should be torture" :rolleyes: