Roe vs Wade ending?

[reformed1689]

What happens is the fertilized egg implants outside the uterus and continues to grow. In the case of an ectopic pregnancy, which mostly occurs in the fallopian tubes, the fertilized egg implants inside of one of the fallopian tubes, continues to grow, causing the fallopian tube to rupture which leads to life-threatening bleeding in the mother.

There is no treatment other than abortion for this. Sometimes, as in the case of a young woman that came into my plasma center last week, it can also cause the removal of one of the fallopian tubes.

Can a baby survive this? If they can, my position is that this is a God choice, not our choice to make.

 

[Naomanos]

Can a baby survive this? If they can, my position is that this is a God choice, not our choice to make.

No. It happens very early in the pregnancy well beyond the age of viability.

So, your position is that if the mother suffers an ectopic pregnancy, which cannot be prevented, it was God's choice and she should die along with the unborn child?

 

[reformed1689]

No. It happens very early in the pregnancy well beyond the age of viability.

So, your position is that if the mother suffers an ectopic pregnancy, which cannot be prevented, it was God's choice and she should die along with the unborn child?

That's not what I said. So the baby dies from this as well and you would not be killing the baby with the abortion it would already be dead? Is that correct?

 

[Naomanos]

That's not what I said. So the baby dies from this as well and you would not be killing the baby with the abortion it would already be dead? Is that correct?

My mistake. You weren't clear in whether it was the unborn child or the mother that you were speaking of.

Usually, waiting for the unborn child to die can often result in death for the mother as well, as the fertilized egg continues to grow. In the case of it happening in the fallopian tube, that can cause a rupture and life-threatening bleeding to the mother.

 

[Naomanos]

Can a baby survive this? If they can, my position is that this is a God choice, not our choice to make.

How serious is an ectopic pregnancy?
An ectopic pregnancy is a medical emergency. The uterus is uniquely suited to hold a growing fetus. It’s an organ that can stretch and expand as the fetus grows. Your fallopian tubes aren’t as flexible. They can burst as the fertilized egg develops. When this happens, you can experience large amounts of internal bleeding. This is life threatening. An ectopic pregnancy needs to be treated right away to avoid injury to the fallopian tube, other organs in the abdominal cavity, internal bleeding and death.

Can my pregnancy continue after an ectopic pregnancy?
Unfortunately, an ectopic pregnancy is fatal for the fetus. It cannot survive outside of the uterus. Quick treatment for an ectopic pregnancy is important to protect the mother’s life. If the egg has implanted in the fallopian tube and the tube bursts, there can be severe internal bleeding. This can lead to maternal death.

Ectopic Pregnancy: Symptoms, Causes, Treatments & Tests

 

[reformed1689]

How serious is an ectopic pregnancy?
An ectopic pregnancy is a medical emergency. The uterus is uniquely suited to hold a growing fetus. It’s an organ that can stretch and expand as the fetus grows. Your fallopian tubes aren’t as flexible. They can burst as the fertilized egg develops. When this happens, you can experience large amounts of internal bleeding. This is life threatening. An ectopic pregnancy needs to be treated right away to avoid injury to the fallopian tube, other organs in the abdominal cavity, internal bleeding and death.

Can my pregnancy continue after an ectopic pregnancy?
Unfortunately, an ectopic pregnancy is fatal for the fetus. It cannot survive outside of the uterus. Quick treatment for an ectopic pregnancy is important to protect the mother’s life. If the egg has implanted in the fallopian tube and the tube bursts, there can be severe internal bleeding. This can lead to maternal death.

Ectopic Pregnancy: Symptoms, Causes, Treatments & Tests

That was my question. If it is fatal for the baby, and as I thought, the baby cannot survive outside of the womb, then I don't see that as an abortion. That would be more along the lines of a natural miscarriage yes? But a surgical procedure to remove the miscarriage is necessary? Am I thinking correctly?

 

[Naomanos]

That was my question. If it is fatal for the baby, and as I thought, the baby cannot survive outside of the womb, then I don't see that as an abortion. That would be more along the lines of a natural miscarriage yes? But a surgical procedure to remove the miscarriage is necessary? Am I thinking correctly?

I think where we're getting crossed is that many times it is an abortion as the unborn child us still alive.

Are you thinking that the unborn child is already dead?

I am driving to work now, so my reply will be delayed.

 

[reformed1689]

I think where we're getting crossed is that many times it is an abortion as the unborn child us still alive.

Are you thinking that the unborn child is already dead?

I am driving to work now, so my reply will be delayed.

If the unborn child is already dead, I see no issue. If it is alive, I have a problem with that.

 

[Naomanos]

If the unborn child is already dead, I see no issue. If it is alive, I have a problem with that.

Let me see if I understand correctly. If the unborn child is already dead, then that's fine, but if still alive and putting the mother at risk of dying, you have an issue?

Why? Do you think the mother should die along with the child? That would be the case in the majority of ectopic pregnancies. In order to stop the bleeding from a ruptured fallopian tube, an abortion on a live unborn child would have to happen. There is no way around that unless you let the mother die too.

Did I understand your position correctly?

 

[JohnPaul]

Let me see if I understand correctly. If the unborn child is already dead, then that's fine, but if still alive and putting the mother at risk of dying, you have an issue?

Why? Do you think the mother should die along with the child? That would be the case in the majority of ectopic pregnancies. In order to stop the bleeding from a ruptured fallopian tube, an abortion on a live unborn child would have to happen. There is no way around that unless you let the mother die too.

Did I understand your position correctly?

Excuse me for stepping in, but I’d have to say that saving the mothers life would be more critical, especially if she has other children to look after, after all it is of no fault of her own, and the logical thing would be to save the mother.

 

[reformed1689]

Let me see if I understand correctly. If the unborn child is already dead, then that's fine, but if still alive and putting the mother at risk of dying, you have an issue?

Why? Do you think the mother should die along with the child? That would be the case in the majority of ectopic pregnancies. In order to stop the bleeding from a ruptured fallopian tube, an abortion on a live unborn child would have to happen. There is no way around that unless you let the mother die too.

Did I understand your position correctly?

How is the child aborted? Is it given birth then die naturally, or is it killed then removed?

 

[reformed1689]

and the logical thing would be to save the mother.

But is that biblical? We aren't talking about man's logic, is that biblical?

 

[Naomanos]

How is the child aborted? Is it given birth then die naturally, or is it killed then removed?

On that I am not aware. I just no that the protocol is to remove the unborn child from the mother in an ectopic pregnancy when the mother's life is at risk.

I am fine with that. I wouldn't want to lose any of my duaghters or someone I am with if it came down to the unborn child implanting in the fallopian tube or losing one of them. In one instance, just the unborn child dies, in the other they both die.

 

[Naomanos]

But is that biblical? We aren't talking about man's logic, is that biblical?

So in your mind, the biblical thing is that they both die when the life of the mother can be saved? Even if either way you do it, the unborn child dies?

 

[Naomanos]

Excuse me for stepping in, but I’d have to say that saving the mothers life would be more critical, especially if she has other children to look after, after all it is of no fault of her own, and the logical thing would be to save the mother.

I am 1000% with you on this.

 

[JohnPaul]

But is that biblical? We aren't talking about man's logic, is that biblical?

If the baby has no chance of surviving outside of the mother’s womb and by keeping the fetus there, means the mother would also die, I would say it’s logical and biblical as God would not let either of them die if he hadn’t intended to. If the baby has no chance of survival then why let the mother die? That would be criminal and against Jehovah’s wishes as Jehovah would rather us save a life rather then take one.

 

[TLHKAJ]

They should outlaw pornography while they’re at it and make it a felony to own or star in it, lock them and the baby murdering murderers up, outlaw same sex marriage all of the abominations towards God, make all of America Christian again and the ruling authority!

I agree to some degree, but where it comes to pornography, I think if it were illegal to own or produce it, that should be enough. The reason I say that is because many women and children are forced to be used in pornography. That isn't their crime. This is largely a human trafficking issue. And our government is complicit in it. They should shut down all their trauma-based mind control projects as well.

Anyway, outlawing abortion is a big start... I hope and pray it really comes to pass. (Although the elite cult will still have access to abortions where it comes to MK victims.)

 

[Wrangler]

Excuse me for stepping in, but I’d have to say that saving the mothers life would be more critical, especially if she has other children to look after, after all it is of no fault of her own, and the logical thing would be to save the mother.

Who ever said overturning Roe v Wade means a women whose life is in danger will not be able to have an abortion?

Look, murder is not a federal crime. Yet, every State outlaws it. Rest easy son.

 

[reformed1689]

If the baby has no chance of surviving outside of the mother’s womb and by keeping the fetus there, means the mother would also die, I would say it’s logical and biblical as God would not let either of them die if he hadn’t intended to. If the baby has no chance of survival then why let the mother die? That would be criminal and against Jehovah’s wishes as Jehovah would rather us save a life rather then take one.

You and I have a very different view of the nature of God I think.

 

[JohnPaul]

Who ever said overturning Roe v Wade means a women whose life is in danger will not be able to have an abortion?

Look, murder is not a federal crime. Yet, every State outlaws it. Rest easy son.

Don’t call me son first of all and second of all I was answering a question if you didn’t see that, and be more polite, at least I had the common courtesy of saying excuse me for stepping into the conversation.