Magical Logic
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 2248
|
Posted: 04-18-07 18:57pm
|
|
|
|
| Sunflower_pie81
wrote: | | chase4
wrote: | | all i am gonna say is twins
are a blessing. twins are not that much
harder than having one
child. |
not for you maybe, but for this lady it
might be
overwhelming. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
chick1978
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 08 Apr 2007
Posts: 68
Location: canada
|
Posted: 04-18-07 19:04pm
|
|
|
|
|
| chase4
wrote: | | Sunflower_pie81
wrote: | | chase4
wrote: | | all i am gonna say is twins
are a blessing. twins are not that much
harder than having one
child. |
not for you maybe, but for this lady it
might be
overwhelming. |
|
I agree with you.
It makes me feel ill to even think of it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sunflower_pie81
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 17 Jan 2006
Posts: 5041
Location: to hell with this crap
|
Posted: 04-18-07 19:40pm
|
|
|
|
|
| chase4
wrote: | | Sunflower_pie81
wrote: | | chase4
wrote: | | all i am gonna say is twins
are a blessing. twins are not that much
harder than having one
child. |
not for you maybe, but for this lady it
might be
overwhelming. |
|
name is .Genipher
I didn't say it was right or wrong to
abort one and "play god"...but it's her
choice not yours. so don't judge her this
is the support forum...there is no room
for you to judge.
Last edited by Sunflower_pie81 on 04-19-07 09:17am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
mc4ever02
Supporter
Joined: 08 Feb 2007
Posts: 3636
Location: Orlando, FL Usa
Thanks: 5
Thanked:2
|
Posted: 04-18-07 19:52pm
|
|
|
|
|
| aren_1987
wrote: | | mc4ever02
wrote: | | Do you know if they are
sharing an amniotic sac or if they are in
seperate
sacs? |
I was thinking the same thing mc4ever02.
The procedure can't be done if they share
a sac. |
Yep, that is were I was going with that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Magical Logic
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 2248
|
Posted: 04-18-07 21:02pm
|
|
|
|
|
| Sunflower_pie81
wrote: | | chase4
wrote: | | Sunflower_pie81
wrote: | | chase4
wrote: | | all i am gonna say is twins
are a blessing. twins are not that much
harder than having one
child. |
not for you maybe, but for this lady it
might be
overwhelming. |
|
excuse me? Where do you get off?? I am
sorry that you have been too busy
listening to Kia and Terra but my name is
.Genipher spelled that way too. sorry you
are on boat with them.
I didn't say it was right or wrong to
abort one and "play god"...but it's her
choice not yours. so don't judge her this
is the support forum...there is no room
for you to
judge. |
Last edited by Magical Logic on 04-19-07 08:24am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sunflower_pie81
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 17 Jan 2006
Posts: 5041
Location: to hell with this crap
|
|
|
|
|
|
Magical Logic
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 2248
|
Posted: 04-19-07 07:59am
|
|
|
|
|
Last edited by Magical Logic on 04-19-07 08:26am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sunflower_pie81
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 17 Jan 2006
Posts: 5041
Location: to hell with this crap
|
Posted: 04-19-07 08:00am
|
|
|
|
|
I just wanted to say,
Sir this is a decision that you and your
wife have to make. the two of you went to
have all this done in order to have a
baby. I find it very hard tobelive that
you and your wife didn't know the risks of
having Multiples when you have medical
assistance with getting pregnant.
Please think long and hard when it comes
to having one removed. it's going to be
very hard on you both in the long run.
keep us posted.
Last edited by Sunflower_pie81 on 04-19-07 09:21am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Willa Weintraub
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 05 Mar 2007
Posts: 3399
Location: The Beach!
Thanks: 30
Thanked:46
|
Posted: 04-19-07 08:15am
|
|
|
|
|
**gone**
chase,please grow up and act accordingly
Last edited by Willa Weintraub on 04-19-07 09:15am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
sillyakchick
Supporter
Joined: 12 Apr 2007
Posts: 2712
Thanks: 8
Thanked:1
|
Posted: 04-19-07 09:09am
|
|
|
|
|
I feel bad for the original poster that
this thread has come to this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Willa Weintraub
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 05 Mar 2007
Posts: 3399
Location: The Beach!
Thanks: 30
Thanked:46
|
Posted: 04-19-07 09:14am
|
|
|
|
|
| sillyakchick
wrote: | | I feel bad for the original
poster that this thread has come to
this. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sunflower_pie81
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 17 Jan 2006
Posts: 5041
Location: to hell with this crap
|
Posted: 04-19-07 09:17am
|
|
|
|
|
| ~*~Melissa~*~
wrote: | | sillyakchick
wrote: | | I feel bad for the original
poster that this thread has come to
this. |
|
I have requested that admin deleat the
drama posts...But apparently the poster
did it herself.
Sorry to the origional poster.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kypros
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 22 Sep 2006
Posts: 373
Location: Leicester
Thanks: 1
Thanked:0
|
Posted: 04-19-07 12:36pm
|
|
|
|
|
| Birch
wrote: | | Kypros
wrote: | You have to look at the
literal meaning of the term 'pro-choice'.
It means 'for (in the sense of agreeing
with and supporting) choice [terminating a
pregnancy]'; it is a euphemism for
'pro-abortion' or 'pro-foetal killings'.
One can deduce that even if s/he wholly
disagrees with abortion, s/he can support
the choice. I certainly believe
that this extends to law. For example, you
said that you do not agree with late-term
non-medical abortions and advocate the
legislation which prohibits them. The
first part is pro-choice (if, of course,
you would still support a woman to make
that decision) all though the latter
isn't, since you are backing a legislation
which limits a woman's choice.
You are enforcing your own view (that
late-term non-medical abortions are wrong,
which is a pro-life view at that) as law,
which I totally disagree with. Every
person who shares that opinion has failed
to convince me or give me a good reason
why they should support its illegality. As
pro-choicers very often say to pro-lifers:
"Fair enough if it's your opinion, but you
don't have the right to apply your opinion
as law", which is most certainly valid
here too. As pro-choicers, I think we
should know better. If you disagree with
late-term non-medical abortions, then
that's your opinion and I don't have
anything against your right to have one of
those, but by supporting an unequal law
you are taking away another person's
rights. Woman's body, woman's
choice, no matter what anybody else
thinks. To be pro-choice in this area,
then I would say the itinery is that you
support such a female's choice and a
law which allows her to make this choice
(law must, in my eyes, be open for
women to be able to do this).
Kypros. |
In my dealings in life, I try to live a
certain way to minimize suffering, pain,
and hatred. Animals through rescue work,
humans through social work. In keeping
consistant with that theme, I ask myself
when is the time where a womans autonomy
to her body can cause suffering and pain
for another. I'm no doctor so I have no
idea when physically this could happen,
except that when some premature babies are
born, they grow into healthy individuals.
When this is a possibility, I consider
that a woman's autonomy is compromised by
her own biology and the choices she's made
(if she's been aware). I don't understand
how a compassionate view of life, such as
what I try to have, can condone an 8th
month termination for reasons other than
the usual medically necessary situations.
I don't shut the door on that however; I
understand that I don't know everything,
and there might be situations in which I
would change my mind completely.
As I understand it, the current
legislation in the US is on par with this.
What would you like to see changed?
Maybe I will agree with
you. |
I'm sorry, but a compassionate view of
life would oppose abortion (and a good
number of other things) altogether. A
foetus is a foetus is a foetus. It has
no
rights whatsoever until birth. It
is legally classed as a person at birth.
One of the most vital criteria needed to
be pro-choice is that you support
abortion, whatever the circumstances,
which makes complete sense as we have the
intelligence to realise that the reasons for
aborting are totally irrelevant - a foetus
is a foetus and a choice is a
choice! Therefore, as we can
understand from that, the gestational
period in which a potentially-terminating
woman is found is not the
point. The foetus is still a
parasite; it still isn't born; it still
occupies its mother's womb; it still isn't
a person; it still bears no rights. All of
these facts apply to an eight-week old
foetus and an eight-month old one. Thus, I
believe that late-term abortions must be
supported - if a woman isn't obliged to
give a reason for wanting a termination at
eight weeks, why should she at eight
months? Why should her rights
diminish after a certain period of time?
Why should she lose control over her own
body for something she doesn't want alive
inside of her? And a question to you and
all of the others who advocate your
opinion: why should you so-called pro-choicers
be hypocritical?
And again, I will say that you don't have
the right to enforce your view as
law. The law must be open always
(and especially with abortion rights) for
women to make their choices. What they
decide to do for social reasons is their
business and only theirs. I would find it
very, very hard to call a person who
supports first- (and possibly second-)
trimester abortions for any reason yet
late-term ones only if they have a medical
problem pro-choice. The whole point of
adhering to this view is so we can back
women having the right to do as they
please with their own body. If you
personally disagree with late-term social
abortions (which I don't, for the record),
then that's fine because it's your
view, but it is most certainly
necessary to fbe fiercely behind a
legislation which allows women to decide
for themselves whether they disagree with
it or not when they are faced with that
decision. We know that no abortion[/i]
is murder, by definition, so you
have no right to oppose, in my humble
view.
As for what I would like to see changed -
pure and simple: I would like to see
[b]every country (obviously) have
abortion legalised for any
reason and at any time in
the pregnancy. I also believe that
only one doctor (rather than two) should
give the go ahead to the termination and
have it arranged (I believe that legally
s/he does not deserve any right to refuse
an abortion, hence why I think it should
be s/he who arranges the procedure, rather
than granting it).
Thanks for listening (reading).
Kypros.
|
|
|
|
|
|
nightangel73
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 09 Nov 2005
Posts: 2769
Location: ,
Thanks: 19
Thanked:18
|
Posted: 04-19-07 22:42pm
|
|
|
|
|
| PurestGreen
wrote: | | It is a well known fact
that multiples are a 'risk' with ivf so
this situation should have been factored
in when you considered the procedure in
the first
place. |
i thought the same thing. Twins are very
common with ivf because obvsiously they
are inserting several embryos. So they can
be one up to the number of the embryos
inserted. That is silly to not have
considered after paying thousands of
dollars in ivf what would happen if two
or three embryos make it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005
Posts: 12984
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
|
Posted: 04-19-07 22:52pm
|
|
|
|
|
| nightangel73
wrote: | | PurestGreen
wrote: | | It is a well known fact
that multiples are a 'risk' with ivf so
this situation should have been factored
in when you considered the procedure in
the first
place. |
i thought the same thing. Twins are very
common with ivf because obvsiously they
are inserting several embryos. So they can
be one up to the number of the embryos
inserted. That is silly to not have
considered after paying thousands of
dollars in ivf what would happen if two
or three embryos make
it. |
yeah; I agree with you on this one for
sure.
|
|
|
|
|
