Left Turn...

[Openmind]

I take it you are done with this topic?

Dang and I was hoping you could explain why they have to hold the baby's head in the woman and stab the baby in the head, making sure it is dead before letting it come all the way out. I guess my mind isn't going to get changed today.

I sure do not know where you got the idea that forcing a breech delivery is ever safer than a natural birth or a c section but since you are done with this topic, the world will never know

As I said before, you are just spewing a lot of "dramatized" propaganda that can be found on any extreme right, extreme religious sites all over the web. Since you so believe in all this. . .why don't you go look at the "smart" answers they have?

And, as I explained, a breech delivery of a tiny foetus, is very unlike a breech delivery of a full size foetus! If you can't understand that. . .just think of giving birth to a tennis ball versus a basket ball. . .and you MAY get the idea!
Right now, you are doing nothing more than trolling.

 

[Pandora]

As I said before, you are just spewing a lot of "dramatized" propaganda that can be found on any extreme right, extreme religious sites all over the web. Since you so believe in all this. . .why don't you go look at the "smart" answers they have?

And, as I explained, a breech delivery of a tiny foetus, is very unlike a breech delivery of a full size foetus! If you can't understand that. . .just think of giving birth to a tennis ball versus a basket ball. . .and you MAY get the idea!
Right now, you are doing nothing more than trolling.

I have never gone to a religious site on the web about partial birth abortion. Why do you keep accusing me of doing things I have not and feeling things I do not?

5 month gestation is bigger than a tennis ball and 8 and 9 month gestation babies are also bigger than tennis balls yet all of them are forced breech in a partial birth abortion.

And again I noticed you cannot or will not explain the need to stab the baby in the back of the head before they let the head come out of the woman.

Not sure if you know the law on partial birth abortion or not but the reason for a forced breech delivery is this.

If the head comes out and the baby is alive you must treat the child like you would any child or human.

If the child's head comes out and it is dead it is considered an abortion but if the head comes out and it is alive it is considered a child, thus you must deliver the head last and this is the reason you must hold the head inside the woman till it can be stabbed in the back of the head till its dead then let it continue being delivered.

You can google a very interesting debate on the senate floor between barbara boxer and another senator on this topic. He was trying to get the laws changed to end late term abortions so he kept asking her when it is considered a child. He asked her when the foot comes out is it a child, she said no, when the torso comes out, again she said no. Her final answer was this

When the mother picks the baby up and claims it as her own, at that point its a baby, person, child.

 

[Openmind]

I have never gone to a religious site on the web about partial birth abortion. Why do you keep accusing me of doing things I have not and feeling things I do not?

5 month gestation is bigger than a tennis ball and 8 and 9 month gestation babies are also bigger than tennis balls yet all of them are forced breech in a partial birth abortion.

And again I noticed you cannot or will not explain the need to stab the baby in the back of the head before they let the head come out of the woman.

I explained that I didn't believe in your propaganda. Whether those sites are "officially" religious sites, or just extremist in terms of pro-life, is a moot point.

The number of late term abortion that takes place at 8 or 9 months is pratically null, and are only perform when the baby is already dead, or is severely handicapped. They are performed through ceasarian sections.

The "late term abortion" the breech birth is referred to are between the 21st and 24 weeks.

Although I am certain that some exceptions that are reprehensible do occur, the way you refer to this whole sad story is as if every late term abortion perform was done at 8 to 9 month of gestation, and that both the foetus and the mother are subjected to the worth forms of torture possible, just for the heck of it.

Again. . you are trolling.

 

[Pandora]

I explained that I didn't believe in your propaganda. Whether those sites are "officially" religious sites, or just extremist in terms of pro-life, is a moot point.

The number of late term abortion that takes place at 8 or 9 months is pratically null, and are only perform when the baby is already dead, or is severely handicapped. They are performed through ceasarian sections.

The "late term abortion" the breech birth is referred to are between the 21st and 24 weeks.

Although I am certain that some exceptions that are reprehensible do occur, the way you refer to this whole sad story is as if every late term abortion perform was done at 8 to 9 month of gestation, and that both the foetus and the mother are subjected to the worth forms of torture possible, just for the heck of it.

Again. . you are trolling.

Ever heard of Dr Tiller? He was very famous for late term abortion and not for the life of the mother. He is dead now but he was replaced and he was not and is not the only one.

I have no problem with a dead child being taken by c section, and that is not an abortion. That is removing a dead child from a poor mother who is probably devastated.

If for some reason a woman's life was at risk for carrying a child I would hope she has an emergency C section regardless of how far along she was and treat the child as best they can and hope it lives but you should not put the possible life of a baby before the life of a mother. and no woman should be forced to deliver breech when she is already in a health risk for carrying a baby in the first place.

You have an interesting definition of trolling... I am replying to your posts. If you do not want me to reply to your posts, don't post to me silly!

 

[Dr.Who]

So I am reading this thread and I am thinking that I am going to skip it when I get to the end of the first page and I see a question about fire retardant pajamas.

Many a time I have been doing laundry and have wondered why anyone would have forced people to buy fire retardant pajamas. I don't think I own any and would be reluctant to bring any more chemicals into the house than I need to.

So I did a quick search and yes the chemicals in the pajamas may very well be harmful with some very real problems for people exposed to them (right next to their skin for long periods of time).

And yes statistically very few people actually die in house fires (and even less while asleep). In a country of over 3 million only about 4000 die in house fires.

And most of those people who do die, die from the smoke and not from the fire.

But if fire retardant pajamas were a good idea then fire retardant day clothes should be a good idea too. I bet people are much more likely to be exposed to flames in the kitchen than in children's bedrooms.

So on balance few lives would be saved by the introduction of hazardous chemicals. A better use of legislation could easily be found. This is another example of poor gov nannyism and probably corporatism too since I bet the legislation was the result of some company being in bed with some politician.

I am still reluctant to post on this thread as I see it has deteriorated into another abortion thread.