From my own observation, I'd say it's
about 6 weeks, going off of the shape of
the head.
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12985
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
Posted: 03-16-08 22:06pm
I'm bumping this in case people missed it.
|
Jules
Moderator
Joined: 19 Aug 2006 Posts: 3760 Location: Merrie Englande, UK
Thanks: 79
Thanked:66
Posted: 03-17-08 07:37am
Yeah, I'd say that is about 5 weeks.
Any reason why you're asking?
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12985
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
Posted: 03-17-08 10:49am
Because it's just more visual proof that
large babies are not being killed during
an abortion.
|
nightangel73
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 09 Nov 2005 Posts: 2511 Location: ,
Thanks: 14
Thanked:10
Posted: 03-17-08 20:15pm
Eiri
wrote:
Because it's just more
visual proof that large babies are not
being killed during an
abortion.
You mean during a early abortion. I see a
life about to be killed in the picture.
God I could never do that.
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12985
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
Posted: 03-17-08 20:22pm
nightangel73
wrote:
Eiri
wrote:
Because it's just more
visual proof that large babies are not
being killed during an
abortion.
You mean during a early abortion. I see a
life about to be killed in the picture.
God I could never do
that.
Because 90% of all abortions are early
abortion is is the MOST relevant image.
You wouldn't use a picture of a giraffe to
describe a location that is almost all
zebra. It's misrepresentation.
And yes, it is a life. So is a cow. Are
you vegetarian? No. Is that a baby? Can
you actually be so brainwashed as to call
that a baby? Yes, you probably could. But
I'm hoping others on here are not so
blind. THIS is the truth.
And so what if YOU couldn't do it? YOU are
not every woman in America. You are just
one woman. You do not have the right to
make a decision for someone else.
|
Birch
Supporter
Joined: 07 Nov 2005 Posts: 3966 Location: Bliss,
Thanks: 129
Thanked:12
Posted: 03-17-08 22:36pm
nightangel73
wrote:
Eiri
wrote:
Because it's just more
visual proof that large babies are not
being killed during an
abortion.
You mean during a early abortion. I see a
life about to be killed in the picture.
God I could never do
that.
I am prochoice, and Irespect your choice.
I know you are not interested in making
abortion illegal as per your previous
posts on ehealth so I am not going to go
off on some redundant soap box based in
nonreality and pepper my response with
insults.
|
meblonde01
Supporter
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 Posts: 2123 Location: ,
Thanks: 6
Thanked:2
Posted: 03-18-08 07:53am
I think it is a matter of your choice what
you see. I can see where a pro-choice
person would find this image ok to abort,
but then on the other hand I can see where
a pro-life person would find the image
non-abort able.
I think it just comes down to what side
you are on..
I don't think the picture is going to
change a pro-lifers thoughts/feelings on
aborting it. just like it won't change a
pro-choicer thoughts/feelings about
aborting it.
A picture is going to change what a person
believes.
|
Jules
Moderator
Joined: 19 Aug 2006 Posts: 3760 Location: Merrie Englande, UK
Thanks: 79
Thanked:66
Posted: 03-18-08 08:02am
If that embryo were in my uterus then it
would be my 'baby'. Even at that stage.
Obviously, that's not medically correct.
I believe that even a tiny embryo is a
unique human life and that is why I would
find it very hard to have an abortion.
I think the key is to understand that what
one's personal beliefs are not necessarily
fact.
|
meblonde01
Supporter
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 Posts: 2123 Location: ,
Thanks: 6
Thanked:2
Posted: 03-18-08 08:13am
Sorry I meant to say "not"
A picture is NOT going to change what a
person believes.
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12985
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
Posted: 03-18-08 08:19am
Then why do pro-lifers use images of
late-term miscarried fetuses and parade
around saying they are aborted babies?
Aren't they trying to change people's
minds? If an image couldn't
do that, they wouldn't use them.
|
meblonde01
Supporter
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 Posts: 2123 Location: ,
Thanks: 6
Thanked:2
Posted: 03-18-08 10:31am
they might be trying to change minds, but
like I said I don't think it works for
either side..
|
Lilly Ivy
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 09 Aug 2007 Posts: 1547 Location: Newell, WV
Thanks: 51
Thanked:85
Posted: 03-18-08 20:17pm
I think it depends on the situation
whether the mother feels it's a 'baby' at
that stage. I'm pro-choice, but basically
as soon as I got pregnant, I felt I had a
'baby' in me. But that's because I WANTED
it there. If the pregnancy is UNWANTED
(rape, broken condom, etc) then the mother
may not feel it's a 'baby', just a 'thing'
in her she wants out.
|
nightangel73
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 09 Nov 2005 Posts: 2511 Location: ,
Thanks: 14
Thanked:10
Posted: 03-18-08 21:48pm
Lilly Ivy
wrote:
I think it depends on the
situation whether the mother feels it's a
'baby' at that stage. I'm pro-choice, but
basically as soon as I got pregnant, I
felt I had a 'baby' in me. But that's
because I WANTED it there. If the
pregnancy is UNWANTED (rape, broken
condom, etc) then the mother may not feel
it's a 'baby', just a 'thing' in her she
wants out.
This I don't understand in abortive women.
Cause you are right that seems to be the
case but then shouldn't it be that even if
it is wanted you should be thinking it is
'thing' and not a 'baby'? See to us
pro-lifers is always 'baby'. We don't
change between 'wanted' or 'unwanted'.
|
Birch
Supporter
Joined: 07 Nov 2005 Posts: 3966 Location: Bliss,
Thanks: 129
Thanked:12
Posted: 03-18-08 22:28pm
nightangel73
wrote:
Lilly Ivy
wrote:
I think it depends on the
situation whether the mother feels it's a
'baby' at that stage. I'm pro-choice, but
basically as soon as I got pregnant, I
felt I had a 'baby' in me. But that's
because I WANTED it there. If the
pregnancy is UNWANTED (rape, broken
condom, etc) then the mother may not feel
it's a 'baby', just a 'thing' in her she
wants out.
This I don't understand in abortive women.
Cause you are right that seems to be the
case but then shouldn't it be that even if
it is wanted you should be thinking it is
'thing' and not a 'baby'? See to us
pro-lifers is always 'baby'. We don't
change between 'wanted' or
'unwanted'.
This may help, I dunno: For me, when I
found out I was pregnant I felt...well,
violated. Disgusted. Sort of like, "Holy
s---, this thing is inside me, growing
inside me, and it's going to be a freakin'
baby! Yeeeack!" I don't like babies at
all. I know others do, and that's fine,
but one thing the poster Cambion and I
have in common is a general dislike of
babies. That "thing" (it was never a baby
to me) was certainly unwanted by both
people who were biologically responsible
for it.
I knew enough biology to know what the
fetus was and looked like, and felt
really, really horrified by this thing
inside my body that I did not want to be
there and I tried to prevent from being
there. I mean, it was like an alien kind
of thing. Something really violating. If
left to it's own devices, it would explode
out my vagina and scream it's head off
until it sucked my boob. I felt
so...animalistic. Degraded, really. The
word "horrified" just sort of took over my
psyche for the whole three days I knew I
was pregnant before I had the abortion..
(I am obviously not cut out to be a
mother!)
But other women have completely different
reactions. They are thrilled to peaches;
it's a baby, it's their offspring, and
they can't wait to have a kid. It's
bizarre to me, but that's fine; that's how
they feel and i respect that. Their baby,
child, is wanted.
Maybe that helps, maybe I'm just
blithering.
|
Darkmoon
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 08 Dec 2007 Posts: 380 Location: ,
Thanks: 72
Thanked:43
Posted: 03-18-08 23:52pm
You and I have a lot in common, Birch. I
for one rarely find babies cute or
appealing on any level. In fact being
around them only cements my desire to
avoid producing one. I'm not in the habit
of putting down women that choose to
reproduce or questioning them for doing
so, regardless of how inappropriate I feel
their situation is for breeding or how
unable I am to empathize with their
alleged need to reproduce to be complete.
However I don't tell these people "don't
breed". They're all to happy to tell me I
have to do so, however.
I'll never understand why unhealthy women
choose to and even take artificial
measures to ensure a condition that will
harm them or even kill them. I'll never
understand why people of both genders are
so desperate to perpetuate their genes
even when said genes carry horrible flaws
and the offspring will suffer for it.
I'll never understand how humans can still
claim to be superior to other animals
because of this alleged ability to think
beyond instinct when we commonly display a
tendency to be illogical and helpless in
the face of reproductive instincts.
In fact, humans are much weaker than
"lesser" animals when it comes to
controlling the urge to multiply, because
so many of us use whatever means possible
to breed even when nature herself has said
"nope, you're not meant to do that...bad
for the gene pool and bad for your
health."
I wonder, who's the more selfish...the
person that recognizes that he or she is
flawed either genetically or instinctively
when it comes to parenting/reproduction
and strives to prevent accidents while
maintaining some level of happiness and
companionship, or the person that refuses
to accept facts regarding financial,
genetic, health and emotional limitations
and breeds because they "want" a baby or
because everyone else has told them it's
what they're supposed to do?
As for the picture, I'd say it's about
eight weeks tops. Truthfully I think that
"babies" inside the womb that look like a
baked bean or primitive form of sea life
are cuter than the veiny, screaming
red-faced things that come out of a woman
at the end of incubation and demand ever
millisecond of her time afterwards.
I would get the poo end of the stick. I'd
have to spend three months short of a year
sharing my body and having my rights
restricted, medical ailments ranging from
puking to hemorrhoids to blood pressure,
labor lasting anywhere from 4-24 hours and
then my privates sliced open with scissors
or my stomach cut open with a scalpel
while my husband sits and feels important
for having an orgasm. Then after sharing
my body for all this time I wouldn't even
be allowed to enjoy having it as my own
again because lactivist personnel would be
shoving this screaming tiny being at me
demanding that I let it suck my nipple
until it cracks and bleeds. Then I'd get
home and have to do all of the drudgework
(because you know, that's what the women
do even though they already do all the
work in reproduction to begin with) while
hubby has a few kodak moments and gets to
choose all the names and makes all the
decisions and then complains because I'm
too tired or sore to share my body with
him.
No bloody thank-you. If you try to force
me to do that you might as well be trying
to send me to hell.
|
nightangel73
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 09 Nov 2005 Posts: 2511 Location: ,
Thanks: 14
Thanked:10
Posted: 03-19-08 06:38am
Darkmoon
wrote:
I would get the poo end of the stick. I'd
have to spend three months short of a year
sharing my body and having my rights
restricted, medical ailments ranging from
puking to hemorrhoids to blood pressure,
labor lasting anywhere from 4-24 hours and
then my privates sliced open with scissors
or my stomach cut open with a scalpel
while my husband sits and feels important
for having an orgasm. Then after sharing
my body for all this time I wouldn't even
be allowed to enjoy having it as my own
again because lactivist personnel would be
shoving this screaming tiny being at me
demanding that I let it suck my nipple
until it cracks and bleeds. Then I'd get
home and have to do all of the drudgework
(because you know, that's what the women
do even though they already do all the
work in reproduction to begin with) while
hubby has a few kodak moments and gets to
choose all the names and makes all the
decisions and then complains because I'm
too tired or sore to share my body with
him.
No bloody thank-you. If you try to force
me to do that you might as well be trying
to send me to
hell.
Omg I can't wait to be preggy!! Just
reading this makes me excited. I do not
plan on breast feeding thought. I'm
officially trying now. Been about 3 weeks
with no birth control. Please send lots of
baby dust for me!
|
meblonde01
Supporter
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 Posts: 2123 Location: ,
Thanks: 6
Thanked:2
Posted: 03-19-08 07:04am
Baby dust, baby dust, baby dust!
|
oopoopoop
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 18 Mar 2004 Posts: 1264 Location: ,
Thanks: 46
Thanked:2
Posted: 03-19-08 08:06am
meblonde01
wrote:
Baby dust, baby dust, baby
dust!
Sorry, is that what you get when you gring
them up really fine?
yes -- i know that is offensive to some
people. But the term "baby dust" is to
deeply, repellantly vile that you need a
good slapping for using it.
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12985
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
Posted: 03-19-08 09:48am
I don't see why it's hard to consider it
wonderful in one case and terrible in
another.
Rape vs Sex. Both involve the same thing,
a penis going into a vagina. But in rape,
it's involuntary so suddenly it's a
horrible event. With sex, it is voluntary
so it's one of the most worshiped of human
behaviors. What, should raped women feel
that the insertion from it is as wonderful
as the insertion from sex? It's the same
thing, isn't it?
