Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

grggngll

Abortioinist find new ways to implement "pro-choice"

23 posts in this topic

A new video exposé released Tuesday of the Aaron Women’s Clinic in Houston, one of three clinics owned by abortionist Douglas Karpen, depicts gruesome details of the practices of an abortionist who is currently facing a criminal investigation for allegedly allowing late-term babies to be born alive then twisting their heads off with his bare hands.

 

According to LifeNews, three former employees of Karpen's brought forward photos taken on their cell phones at his clinic on Schumacher Lane in Houston. The photos depicted two babies aborted well beyond the legal limit of 24 weeks in Texas. The babies’ necks had been cut.

 

In the new video produced by Life Dynamics, a national pro-life organization, the three former employees of abortionist Karpen allege that the Kermit Gosnell “house of horrors” abortion clinic was not the anomaly that the abortion industry says it is.

 

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/05/15/Texas-Lt-Gov-Demands-Investigation-of-Abortionist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like these 'creative' infant terminations (i.e. pro-choice implementations) are quite widespread.

 

Let's see, we have:

locking up born alive babies in a room and wait for them to die;

snipping spines;

severing necks;

sucking out brains;

dismembering;

twist, turn and pull.

 

What a bunch of degenerates! That includes the Leftists who provide linguistic cover for those that implement what 'pro-choice' means.

 

I am happy to report that the 0 curse continues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why do people who are opposed to abortion work in abortion clinics? Why don't they report these incidents to the authorities when they occur?

 

My question as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why do people who are opposed to abortion work in abortion clinics? Why don't they report these incidents to the authorities when they occur?

 

Simple, the almighty dollar rules and most people are hypocrites. There's abundant evidence of both on these forums.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am in principle against abortion, believing that a fetus is a living human being. But as a conservative opposed to oppressive government control over our personal lives, I cannot endorse making the procedure illegal. There are in fact circumstances that mitigate ending a pregnancy, and no matter what it needs to be the decision of the parents and their doctor. The life of the child is not the only consideration. Just like many issues and behaviors we would like to see regulated, instead of draconian laws that force individuals into inapplicable categories, much can be accomplished by providing alternative options, parental participation in the decision for young women, education to make people aware of those options as well as the consequences of abortion (lots of women are unexpectedly deeply hurt spiritually, physically and and emotionally by the process), and perhaps even incentives to choose life. The reproductive rights crowd and the abortion industry act like this is some sort of unconscionable intrusion on women, but this issue is not that simple. It is true you cannot legislate morality, but there is nothing wrong with at least presenting morality, and certainly nothing wrong with expecting doctors and providers to have ethical standards and comply with the laws about late term abortions. Scenes like Gosnell and Aaron clinics are the result of practicing without ethics. Some times right and wrong should take precedence over rights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am in principle against abortion, believing that a fetus is a living human being. But as a conservative opposed to oppressive government control over our personal lives, I cannot endorse making the procedure illegal. There are in fact circumstances that mitigate ending a pregnancy, and no matter what it needs to be the decision of the parents and their doctor. The life of the child is not the only consideration. Just like many issues and behaviors we would like to see regulated, instead of draconian laws that force individuals into inapplicable categories, much can be accomplished by providing alternative options, parental participation in the decision for young women, education to make people aware of those options as well as the consequences of abortion (lots of women are unexpectedly deeply hurt spiritually, physically and and emotionally by the process), and perhaps even incentives to choose life. The reproductive rights crowd and the abortion industry act like this is some sort of unconscionable intrusion on women, but this issue is not that simple. It is true you cannot legislate morality, but there is nothing wrong with at least presenting morality, and certainly nothing wrong with expecting doctors and providers to have ethical standards and comply with the laws about late term abortions. Scenes like Gosnell and Aaron clinics are the result of practicing without ethics. Some times right and wrong should take precedence over rights.

 

Sounds Heretical...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am in principle against abortion, believing that a fetus is a living human being. But as a conservative opposed to oppressive government control over our personal lives, I cannot endorse making the procedure illegal. There are in fact circumstances that mitigate ending a pregnancy, and no matter what it needs to be the decision of the parents and their doctor. The life of the child is not the only consideration. Just like many issues and behaviors we would like to see regulated, instead of draconian laws that force individuals into inapplicable categories, much can be accomplished by providing alternative options, parental participation in the decision for young women, education to make people aware of those options as well as the consequences of abortion (lots of women are unexpectedly deeply hurt spiritually, physically and and emotionally by the process), and perhaps even incentives to choose life. The reproductive rights crowd and the abortion industry act like this is some sort of unconscionable intrusion on women, but this issue is not that simple. It is true you cannot legislate morality, but there is nothing wrong with at least presenting morality, and certainly nothing wrong with expecting doctors and providers to have ethical standards and comply with the laws about late term abortions. Scenes like Gosnell and Aaron clinics are the result of practicing without ethics. Some times right and wrong should take precedence over rights.

 

Reminds me of one of my favorite quotes:

 

“Morality cannot be legislated, but behavior can be regulated. Judicial decrees may not change the heart, but they can restrain the heartless.”

 

 

― Martin Luther King Jr.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am in principle against abortion, believing that a fetus is a living human being. But as a conservative opposed to oppressive government control over our personal lives, I cannot endorse making the procedure illegal. There are in fact circumstances that mitigate ending a pregnancy, and no matter what it needs to be the decision of the parents and their doctor. The life of the child is not the only consideration. Just like many issues and behaviors we would like to see regulated, instead of draconian laws that force individuals into inapplicable categories, much can be accomplished by providing alternative options, parental participation in the decision for young women, education to make people aware of those options as well as the consequences of abortion (lots of women are unexpectedly deeply hurt spiritually, physically and and emotionally by the process), and perhaps even incentives to choose life. The reproductive rights crowd and the abortion industry act like this is some sort of unconscionable intrusion on women, but this issue is not that simple. It is true you cannot legislate morality, but there is nothing wrong with at least presenting morality, and certainly nothing wrong with expecting doctors and providers to have ethical standards and comply with the laws about late term abortions. Scenes like Gosnell and Aaron clinics are the result of practicing without ethics. Some times right and wrong should take precedence over rights.

 

There you go injecting commonsense into the discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First, let me say, I have always been pro-choice, never have wavered, and after 30+ years of nursing I still believe the same way.

 

Second, after 30+ years of nursing, it is difficult for me to post here, with the knowledge and experiences I have had to make blanket statements about abortions at 20+ weeks. There are medical conditions, both for the woman and fetus that occur that warrant late term abortions for the health of the woman. There are woman who do not have the money for the procedure to have it done earlier, there are women who have loss access to woman's clinics such as in Jackson, Mississippi (there is one clinic in the entire state), there are women who misjudge the gestational age, some are actually pressured into the abortion.

 

Thirdly, I do know that women will seek to end pregnancies as they have done throughout history, they will seek them out in back alleys and most likely die from it. I had a great grandmother who did so and died from a botched abortion (my great grandfather left her destitute with 2 children to raise and she found herself pregnant again).

 

I do not walk in those women's shoes, and they do not walk in mine. It is so much easier to point and judge, harder to understand how and why and to help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

songfourone, I have always been pro-choice except for late-term abortions. I've never understood the need for a woman to have one. Could a cesarean be done and the baby given up for adoption rather than killing it? I've asked this question of others and have never gotten an answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
songfourone, I have always been pro-choice except for late-term abortions. I've never understood the need for a woman to have one. Could a cesarean be done and the baby given up for adoption rather than killing it? I've asked this question of others and have never gotten an answer.

 

Late term abortions are considered to be abortions 20 weeks plus, and account for 1.4% of abortions in the US. As I said in my previous post there are many reasons why, when you only have one clinic in the entire state that could be an issue, so affordability and access, misjudging the gestational age, emotional stress/not being able to make decision and inability to inform parents/partner, lack of education or understanding, and medical issues, to name just a few, and some people are just not responsible.

 

As you can see most abortions are done way before the 20th week period in fact the average is 9 weeks. Abortions past 24 weeks are very seldom (approx 0.08%, just over 1000 pregnancies) but do occur but reasons are not listed and may or may not have a medical basis for it.

 

At early and later term abortions all avenues should be explored with education and support for the woman to make the choice that is best for her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you for answering my question. I especially agree with your last sentence.

 

I am a firm believer of making educated medical choices no matter what, patients do not ask nor should they receive moral or judgements from staff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Houston doctor Douglas Karpen is accused by four former employees of delivering live fetuses during third-trimester abortions and killing them by either snipping their spinal cord, stabbing a surgical instrument into their heads or 'twisting their heads off their necks with his own bare hands'.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2325786/Douglas-Karpen-Second-house-horrors-abortion-clinic-investigated-Texas.html#ixzz2TYcfqOgO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The right of choice for women must be made absolute. It is a very personal choice that must be made by a woman whose privacy to make that choice is guaranteed. Abortion is not pleasant. It is not expected to be pleasant. Some choices in life are not pleasant but they must be made and guaranteed. A woman must be assured that whatever her choice will be that her choice shall be guarded in privacy. She may elect to keep her fetus or she may elect to not keep it. Regardless, it is her choice and her choice, only. No man has any right to tell any woman what she must or must not do. No woman has any right to to tell another woman what she must or must not do. Freedom of choice does not automatically mean abortion. Abortion is a choice. Birth is a choice. That choice must be respected and guaranteed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The right of choice for women must be made absolute. It is a very personal choice that must be made by a woman whose privacy to make that choice is guaranteed. Abortion is not pleasant. It is not expected to be pleasant. Some choices in life are not pleasant but they must be made and guaranteed. A woman must be assured that whatever her choice will be that her choice shall be guarded in privacy. She may elect to keep her fetus or she may elect to not keep it. Regardless, it is her choice and her choice, only. No man has any right to tell any woman what she must or must not do. No woman has any right to to tell another woman what she must or must not do. Freedom of choice does not automatically mean abortion. Abortion is a choice. Birth is a choice. That choice must be respected and guaranteed.

 

Not to mention education, affordability and safety.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The right of choice for women must be made absolute. It is a very personal choice that must be made by a woman whose privacy to make that choice is guaranteed. Abortion is not pleasant. It is not expected to be pleasant. Some choices in life are not pleasant but they must be made and guaranteed. A woman must be assured that whatever her choice will be that her choice shall be guarded in privacy. She may elect to keep her fetus or she may elect to not keep it. Regardless, it is her choice and her choice, only. No man has any right to tell any woman what she must or must not do. No woman has any right to to tell another woman what she must or must not do. Freedom of choice does not automatically mean abortion. Abortion is a choice. Birth is a choice. That choice must be respected and guaranteed.

 

So, if a woman decides she really doesn't want a child, she can terminate it a few weeks before delivery? Who is speaking for the child? Where are it's rights? When did we give the power of life and death to a woman simply because she's carrying a child? Is that what Roe really did? This "sanctity of choice" argument is exactly what leads to the Gosnell type horrors. When we value privacy over life we degrade ourselves and have no right to complain about the results. If the choice is absolute, then so are the methods used to implement it and Gosnell should still be in business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites