11 Bravo (1000+ posts) Fri Dec-04-09 08:44 PM
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7158473
I'll never forget the day my wife decided to have an "elective abortion".
Edited on Fri Dec-04-09 08:46 PM by 11 Bravo
OK, I guess that technically she didn't decide, I did. You see, she was unconscious at the time. I've posted about this before, but the current debate about health care reform has brought out a host of individuals who claim that abortion is "elective" surgery, so I thought I would re-visit it.
Here's how the love of my life "elected" to have an abortion.
One night after dinner, my sweetheart went to the toilet. I still thank God that I didn't head downstairs to watch football. After a while I knocked on the door (at that time we were living in a one-bathroom townhouse), and received no answer. Eventually, I went in, and found my bride lying on the bathroom floor in a puddle of blood. We found out at the hospital that the child we were trying to have had been conceived as an ectopic pregnancy. We hadn't even know she was pregnant. A therapeutic abortion and removal of her right fallopian tube saved her life, while reducing by half our chance to have the children we so devoutly hoped for. The doctor told me that had we arrived thirty minutes later she might have bled to death.
So **** you, Mr. Stupak. **** you Bill O'Reilly. **** every member of Congress who, had they been able, would have signed my wife's death warrant. I hope you never have to pick up the dead weight of a loved one, carry them out to the car, lay them down in the driveway so you can open the car door, and then strap your unconscious and hemorrhaging spouse into a seat. But if you do, I hope you learn from the experience.
(By the way, my wife and I have now have two amazing sons, ages 13 and 16, and they can't wait to be old enough to vote for a Democratic candidate.)
Seeing more and more of the 'Elective Abortion' bullshit.
bobbolink (1000+ posts) Fri Dec-04-09 08:46 PM
Response to Original message
2. Beautiful story. Thank you.
Rec'd, because of the unrec brigade.
Bobo, living under the bridge in Denver, stealing wireless from Starbucks...
tonysam (1000+ posts) Fri Dec-04-09 08:52 PM
Response to Original message
5. That's a medically necessary abortion, which would not be banned under
Stupak. That's not the same thing at all as having an elective abortion. I think you know that.
"Therapeutic" abortion isn't "elective" abortion, or "abortion on demand."
never correct fiction with the facts...
bobbolink (1000+ posts) Fri Dec-04-09 08:55 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. Its all the same to the RW, and I think you know *that*.
They insist on using the term "partial birth abortion", even though they KNOW that it is almost ALWAYS a matter of the life of the mother.
They simply don't care.
stop shitting on Bobo's bloody parade.
shadesofgray (82 posts) Fri Dec-04-09 09:10 PM
Response to Reply #9
16. Exactly. The Catholic Church does NOT permit abortion in the case of an ectopic pregnancy.
And Nelson and other senators are taking their orders from the Catholic church.
Gawdammed Cat-lickers!!!
Ms. Toad (1000+ posts) Fri Dec-04-09 10:38 PM
Response to Reply #16
32. That is not really correct
In the event of an ectopic pregnancy, the Catholic church permits the removal of the fallopian tube (or a section thereof containing the embryo). The intended purpose is to save the life of the mother; the unintended consequence of that act is the death of the fetus. This is the procedure the OP had.
(The Catholic church does not permit an alternate treatment which is administering medication to kill the developing embryo.)
http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_hist_c1.htm
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01046b.htm
http://www.epigee.org/guide/catholicism.html
As to Stupak - the amendment is bad. I hope it is removed from the House Bill, and the proposed amendment defeated in the Senate.
BUT as bad as the amendment is, it would permit federally subsidized insurance policies to cover both common methods of treating ectopic pregnancies. Ectopic pregnancies are life threatening The OP was told that at the hospital, and no doctor who got his license anywhere other than a crackerjack box would argue with that assessment.
The Stupak amendment says:
"No funds . . . may be used to pay for any abortion or to cover any part of the costs of any health plan that includes coverage of abortion, except in the case where a woman suffers from a physical disorder, physical injury, or physical illness that would, as certified by a physician, place the woman in danger of death unless an abortion is performed. . ."
In other words, funds are permitted to be used for abortions because an ectopic pregnancy places the woman in danger of death unless an abortion is performed.
damned facts...
defendandprotect (1000+ posts) Sat Dec-05-09 02:43 AM
Response to Reply #16
59. Some time ago, we had a story here at DU where a woman suffering a miscarriage ...
was turned away from one of the hospitals by an official because he was concerned
that someone might think the hospital was participating in performing an abortion!!!
What crap like the religious Holy Rollers do is to confuse the public -- and to
create new impasses for women -- and if it endangers the lives of women, they don't care!
crazyjoe (111 posts) Sat Dec-05-09 07:35 AM
Response to Reply #16
73. that is just completely false. sorry
we can support a womans right to choose, without making shit up
Joe? You are on DU. Making up shit is about all they got.
defendandprotect (1000+ posts) Sat Dec-05-09 07:56 PM
Response to Reply #76
194. In fact, the Roman Catholic Church is seeking to deny women the right to "self-defense" ...
IF the assault is by a fetus -- !!!
This is another gem which distorts today's debate and the past ...
respects the lives of both.
In fact, Catholic Hospitals were notorious for "saving the child" and letting the
mother die!
Obviously, arguing that a fetus or a fertilized egg is the equal of a living woman
isn't something that anyone buys . . . including Catholic women who have as many
abortions as any other women!!
It's a losing argument from every angle and that's why their "Pro-life-assassins" resort
to MURDER OF DOCTORS ...
defend and protect is making a last minute run for DUmpmpnkie of the year...
whopis01 (1000+ posts) Sat Dec-05-09 10:24 AM
Response to Reply #16
92. That is incorrect. In the Humanae Vitae encyclical, Pope Paul VI said the opposite.
So long as the intent of the medical procedure is not to be an impediment to procreation, it is allowed.
Basically, they are against abortion if the purpose is to prevent pregnancy. If the purpose is to save the mother's life and the termination of the pregnancy is a foreseeable but unavoidable outcome, then it is approved by the church.
JetCityLiberal (628 posts) Fri Dec-04-09 11:01 PM
Response to Reply #5
35. You are anti abortion no matter what just like the right wing
and you have the right wing anti abortion crap posts down pat.
Abortion is a necessary medical procedure right wing crap anti life liars.
Pro life my ass. Same fetus fetish crap. Transparent crap posts.
Paul
jetcity wears a ghey pink triangle.
Control-Z (1000+ posts) Sat Dec-05-09 03:42 AM
Response to Reply #5
65. You really need to educate yourself.
There are a bunch of crazy, right wing, religious ****wads who are anti-birth control, anti-choice, anti-women...They believe that ectopic pregnancies should be left to run their course - which ALWAYS means death to both the woman and the fetus. And yes, they consider an ectopic procedure to be elective.
Frankly, imo, every abortion is therapeutic. When a woman chooses abortion because she doesn't feel capable of mothering a child or she can't afford to, it is a therapeutic decision on some level for her, and for most women, a compassionate one as well.
yup. Liberals want abortion on demand to be a basic human right.
it gets worse from there...
