How else would you like to describe it, exactly?? Platitudes don't change what has taken place. We are in a debate forum here with adults, and I was driving home a point.
It is exactly what they have done, is it not? They have had sex with a guy knowing FULL WELL that they CAN get pregnant doing that, and yet they feel it is ok to then BRUTALLY KILL a human being .... YOU DON'T CALL THAT DEHUMANIZING???!!! ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!!! I think you should stop looking at things in platitudes.
Regarding God.... Are you trying to imply that it is GOD who has done the rape, torture, maiming, killing??? Huh... REALLY?!! How strange. Whether you believe in God or not, We MUST TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR OUR OWN ACTIONS. IT'S THE BOTTOM LINE.
Blaming OUR MISDEEDS on a deity is just weird, frankly. If a person does good because they have spent time learning how to be a good person (say, via the Bible) then bravo to them for trying to be a good person. But if a person CHOOSES to do evil, ignoring what has been taught by the christian God that is spoken of in the Bible, like having sex with a guy without consideration for a possible pregnancy, and then killing the baby afterward, well, that person has to admit to their own terrible actions. God had nothing to do with it. He has spoken thru Jesus and Bible, but he is not coming down here on earth and doing the actions of people for them. Blaming God is the victimhood narrative. UGH UGH UGH
I do believe that a child created from "opening up one's legs to a much beloved and committed man" is a beautiful act of love, and the child born to them is a blessing. But when a woman opens up her legs to a man, without consideration for the potential pregnancy, and then kills the baby, she is then a killer of her own child. There is NO ESCAPING THIS FACT. Whether you call it a baby or a fetus or an organism, or whatever... you have killed it.
And that, in my book, is the ultimate in dehumanizing behavior.
"I also do not think a nine-week-old fetus is the same thing as a baby. Or as the woman carrying it. Which is why I do not think abortion in the first trimester is the same as murder. I look at laws in places like Denmark and Ireland, which bar abortion after 12 weeks, or Germany and France, which bar it at 14 weeks, and those seem to me like sensible compromises."
It has been said that one can practice useful medical ethics without the correct medical facts. The truths that have been recorded in most of the media including this piece suggest that the survival and QOL of infants with Trisomy 18 preclude any kind of meaningful life. In my experience, this is manifestly untrue. While some mothers carrying a T18 fetus have spontaneous miscarriage, most do not and few have long-lasting irreversible issues with subsequent fertility. What has bee written is heavily influenced by the massive anti-life philosophy of most young obstetricians. They have no empiric knowledge of the natural history of T18. See Rick Santorum's description of his 24 year old daughter with T18. Yes, she is developmentally disabled but she knows her family, loves them and has inspired much love. Clearly, Ms. Cox had the legal right to leave TX for abortion. I question whether she was provided true informed consent.
The even-handedness in this discussion is why I subscribe to the Free Press. Would someone be willing to share why they don't believe a 9 week old fetus isn't the same as a baby? Is it a viability standard?
I can’t thank you enough for your efforts to provide both sides of the issue in question. You are an invaluable resource to those of us who want to look at both sides.
I have friends who go to the same synagogue as I do. They had a daughter with a genetic disorder that had to do with copper accumulating in her body. She was a normal child, who lost more and more functionality and mental capacity, until she died at about 30. Her parents were so invested in her, they did not have the energy for other kids.
OBGYN here. Trisomy 18 is not a threat to the mother’s life and health. It’s a threat to the baby. Therefore, what’s at issue here is a value judgement about whether a disabled child should live until natural death or should have their life ended prematurely either through previable delivery or through a D and E. Aborting a child like this is in effect a direct attack on the innocent child. Arguing on the termination side enters into a eugenics position about the whether or not a disabled person should live. Morally it’s just not defensible. And we can’t ignore the moral evil that is wrought by abortion. It’s far worse than the physical evil of suffering of the mother and child, as awful as that admittedly is.
I've heard and read coverage of this story in several outlets. This is the first place I've seen the photo of Rick Santorum's daughter. Thank you for posting that.
The Texas law is very poorly written, as even staunchly pro-life observers have noted. Also she'd been to the emergency room 4 times in the course of her pregnancy with serious complications. There wasn't much cause for doubt that the pregnancy threatened her health, not just the baby's. Bad facts/bad law, etc.
Doctors are not lawyers. They are vulnerable to legal alarmism. Activists on both sides may have motive to exaggerate the legal risks.
Doctors already pay huge malpractice insurance premiums. Obstetricians pay some of the highest. I sincerely doubt malpractice insurance would cover them in a criminal prosecution.
Kate has waived her privacy. Can Kate share with us how they killed the baby? People should know. The situation is tragic but the baby had a soul. The mother killed her rather than hope for an opportunity to hold her, look in her eyes and love her as long as possible. I'm sickened that she chose to make it so political.
"...the judges found unanimously that Cox’s doctor “could not, or at least did not, attest to the court that Ms. Cox’s condition poses the risks the exception requires”
As I understand the case, she argues carrying the baby further subjects her to a third C-section. A third C-section she argues carries a substantial likelihood of requiring a hysterectomy. That risk, from what was claimed to be her lawyer's brief, is roughly .9%.
She is arguing potential future harm should meet the requirements of the statute's exceptions.
It doesn't matter whether I, or anyone else for the matter, agrees or disagrees with her. The case raises a very serious concern. Assuming for argument that she fails the statutory criteria, it is not terribly difficult to conceive of facts that do meet the criteria.
For example: "A study of the medical records of 56,741 California Medicaid patients revealed that women who had abortions were 160 percent more likely than delivering women to be hospitalized for psychiatric treatment in the first 90 days following abortion or delivery. Rates of psychiatric treatment remained significantly higher for at least four years." Id.
I'm not a strong pro-lifer, but abortion providers like Planned Parenthood should advise their clients of the potential psychological consequences of killing their unborn child. Of course, this is not a factor the court should consider in deciding whether abortion is a constitutional right, as in Roe, or within the domain of the states, as in Dobbs.
Nope. A real female. ;)
How else would you like to describe it, exactly?? Platitudes don't change what has taken place. We are in a debate forum here with adults, and I was driving home a point.
It is exactly what they have done, is it not? They have had sex with a guy knowing FULL WELL that they CAN get pregnant doing that, and yet they feel it is ok to then BRUTALLY KILL a human being .... YOU DON'T CALL THAT DEHUMANIZING???!!! ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!!! I think you should stop looking at things in platitudes.
Regarding God.... Are you trying to imply that it is GOD who has done the rape, torture, maiming, killing??? Huh... REALLY?!! How strange. Whether you believe in God or not, We MUST TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR OUR OWN ACTIONS. IT'S THE BOTTOM LINE.
Blaming OUR MISDEEDS on a deity is just weird, frankly. If a person does good because they have spent time learning how to be a good person (say, via the Bible) then bravo to them for trying to be a good person. But if a person CHOOSES to do evil, ignoring what has been taught by the christian God that is spoken of in the Bible, like having sex with a guy without consideration for a possible pregnancy, and then killing the baby afterward, well, that person has to admit to their own terrible actions. God had nothing to do with it. He has spoken thru Jesus and Bible, but he is not coming down here on earth and doing the actions of people for them. Blaming God is the victimhood narrative. UGH UGH UGH
I do believe that a child created from "opening up one's legs to a much beloved and committed man" is a beautiful act of love, and the child born to them is a blessing. But when a woman opens up her legs to a man, without consideration for the potential pregnancy, and then kills the baby, she is then a killer of her own child. There is NO ESCAPING THIS FACT. Whether you call it a baby or a fetus or an organism, or whatever... you have killed it.
And that, in my book, is the ultimate in dehumanizing behavior.
"I also do not think a nine-week-old fetus is the same thing as a baby. Or as the woman carrying it. Which is why I do not think abortion in the first trimester is the same as murder. I look at laws in places like Denmark and Ireland, which bar abortion after 12 weeks, or Germany and France, which bar it at 14 weeks, and those seem to me like sensible compromises."
Why?
It has been said that one can practice useful medical ethics without the correct medical facts. The truths that have been recorded in most of the media including this piece suggest that the survival and QOL of infants with Trisomy 18 preclude any kind of meaningful life. In my experience, this is manifestly untrue. While some mothers carrying a T18 fetus have spontaneous miscarriage, most do not and few have long-lasting irreversible issues with subsequent fertility. What has bee written is heavily influenced by the massive anti-life philosophy of most young obstetricians. They have no empiric knowledge of the natural history of T18. See Rick Santorum's description of his 24 year old daughter with T18. Yes, she is developmentally disabled but she knows her family, loves them and has inspired much love. Clearly, Ms. Cox had the legal right to leave TX for abortion. I question whether she was provided true informed consent.
My Reform Jewish mother used to joke that abortion should be legal up to the point that the fetus graduates from law school or medical school.
The even-handedness in this discussion is why I subscribe to the Free Press. Would someone be willing to share why they don't believe a 9 week old fetus isn't the same as a baby? Is it a viability standard?
I am proud to be a member here. Thank you for a sane place to discuss divergent viewpoints
I can’t thank you enough for your efforts to provide both sides of the issue in question. You are an invaluable resource to those of us who want to look at both sides.
I have friends who go to the same synagogue as I do. They had a daughter with a genetic disorder that had to do with copper accumulating in her body. She was a normal child, who lost more and more functionality and mental capacity, until she died at about 30. Her parents were so invested in her, they did not have the energy for other kids.
OBGYN here. Trisomy 18 is not a threat to the mother’s life and health. It’s a threat to the baby. Therefore, what’s at issue here is a value judgement about whether a disabled child should live until natural death or should have their life ended prematurely either through previable delivery or through a D and E. Aborting a child like this is in effect a direct attack on the innocent child. Arguing on the termination side enters into a eugenics position about the whether or not a disabled person should live. Morally it’s just not defensible. And we can’t ignore the moral evil that is wrought by abortion. It’s far worse than the physical evil of suffering of the mother and child, as awful as that admittedly is.
I've heard and read coverage of this story in several outlets. This is the first place I've seen the photo of Rick Santorum's daughter. Thank you for posting that.
The Texas law is very poorly written, as even staunchly pro-life observers have noted. Also she'd been to the emergency room 4 times in the course of her pregnancy with serious complications. There wasn't much cause for doubt that the pregnancy threatened her health, not just the baby's. Bad facts/bad law, etc.
Doctors are not lawyers. They are vulnerable to legal alarmism. Activists on both sides may have motive to exaggerate the legal risks.
Doctors already pay huge malpractice insurance premiums. Obstetricians pay some of the highest. I sincerely doubt malpractice insurance would cover them in a criminal prosecution.
Kate has waived her privacy. Can Kate share with us how they killed the baby? People should know. The situation is tragic but the baby had a soul. The mother killed her rather than hope for an opportunity to hold her, look in her eyes and love her as long as possible. I'm sickened that she chose to make it so political.
"...the judges found unanimously that Cox’s doctor “could not, or at least did not, attest to the court that Ms. Cox’s condition poses the risks the exception requires”
As I understand the case, she argues carrying the baby further subjects her to a third C-section. A third C-section she argues carries a substantial likelihood of requiring a hysterectomy. That risk, from what was claimed to be her lawyer's brief, is roughly .9%.
She is arguing potential future harm should meet the requirements of the statute's exceptions.
It doesn't matter whether I, or anyone else for the matter, agrees or disagrees with her. The case raises a very serious concern. Assuming for argument that she fails the statutory criteria, it is not terribly difficult to conceive of facts that do meet the criteria.
A quick internet survey shows that there is no real debate about psychological problems:
All Studies Report Higher Rates of Psychological Problems After Abortion Compared to Other Women. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6207970/
For example: "A study of the medical records of 56,741 California Medicaid patients revealed that women who had abortions were 160 percent more likely than delivering women to be hospitalized for psychiatric treatment in the first 90 days following abortion or delivery. Rates of psychiatric treatment remained significantly higher for at least four years." Id.
I'm not a strong pro-lifer, but abortion providers like Planned Parenthood should advise their clients of the potential psychological consequences of killing their unborn child. Of course, this is not a factor the court should consider in deciding whether abortion is a constitutional right, as in Roe, or within the domain of the states, as in Dobbs.