An interesting topic of conversation.

Quote from: optimisticcynic on March 10, 2009, 09:43:48 AM

Quote from: Ravenwood240 on March 10, 2009, 09:37:38 AM

Quote from: Raist on March 09, 2009, 10:20:53 PM

Quote from: Ravenwood240 on March 09, 2009, 12:00:08 PM

Quote from: Space Cowgirl on March 09, 2009, 11:51:49 AM

How many 5 yr old girls do you think have successfully given birth to twins?  How many 5 yr old girls have successfully given birth, period? I imagine most of them die.  None of that is relevant to this situation.  There are full grown women who die from giving birth.

There was enough evidence that the girl would die from carrying the twins to term or the doctors wouldn't have performed the abortion.  Brazil has very strict laws about it, and I doubt the doctors arbitrarily decided it was OK for this girl to have an abortion.  They stated that her uterus wasn't big enough for one baby, let alone two. 

@ Raist:  The danger that the doctors talked about was for carrying to term... she doesn't have to carry to term.  They could have taken the babies at 26 weeks, saving both the mother and the children.

As for the man... The priest is correct.  God made no laws about what he did, not that he could be excommed for.

Another thing I don't agree with, but I, who am not of their faith, cannot tell them how to run their business.

And when they did, they knew, or should have known that the Church would take a dim view of it.  If they decided that that girl was more important to them than their religion and are willing to stand by that decision, I applaud them.

I doubt they thought the catholic church would demonize them for it. Also would you please give us the survival rate of 9 year old girls who give birth? Then could you give us the rate of survival with twins? Just because it has happened does not mean it is likely or even plausible.

They saved the little girls life, the fact that the church interpreted the rules in such an unjust and draconian manner is shocking. The catholic church usually does allow abortions in cases of extreme risk to the mother, and also I believe in cases of incest. The fact the vatican agreed with the cardinal is more political than dogma based and is a sign that the religion is not flawed but those that enforce it are not concerned about obeying it.

Raist, to say outright that they saved her life is as foolish as excomming them in the first place.

They gave an opinion that she could not survive to term.  Since C-section is the most common way to deal with a small frame, carrying to term is not going to happen.  And since technology can remove the baby as young as 22 weeks, they cannot make a valid argument that they had to do it, not that is valid for the Catholic Church.

That is why they were excommed... because they didn't even try to consider any other options before killing two beings.

I'm not saying I agree with either side in this case... but you cannot make blanket statements about either side either.

Except that they're all human.

Don't forget were this is. Brazil. How good are there hospitals? The Doctors probably did save her life. Yes there is a chance she could survive but if it is one in a thousand I think you can say they saved her life.

Actually, they have a very good health system there.

http://www.scielo.br/pdf/rsp/v41n5/en_5965.pdf

http://jhppl.dukejournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/9/3/515  (May not view, was a college link.)

http://www.indexmundi.com/g/r.aspx?c=br&v=29

And their infant mortality rate is not that bad as the last chart shows.  The girl was already 15 weeks along.  If they can do a C-section at 24/26 weeks, they could have done it then tried to save those children, who had done nothing, and still been reasonably safe.

They allowed emotion to rule their actions.  Not always a bad thing, but in this case, they're all going to pay for it.

bolded the ironic parts.

They did not act on emotion. They erred on the side of caution.

They erred, that much we agree on.  I don't think abortion is the first answer you need to be looking at any time something like this happens.

I wonder how much of that haste was because the girl's family couldn't pay for the care it would have taken?

That second link I posted a minute ago showed that Brazil has a long history of giving better care to private patients and allowing those that can't pay for C sections to suffer long beyond any point that would be acceptable in America or most countries.

Had that girl been rich enough to pay for seven weeks of pampered care in a private room and the C section... would that have changed their minds?

I don't think abortion is the first answer you need to be looking at any time something like this happens.

Watch out Raven, Wendy are Raist are going to yell at you, and call you names.

Quote from: Ravenwood240 on March 10, 2009, 10:14:36 AM

I don't think abortion is the first answer you need to be looking at any time something like this happens.

Watch out Raven, Wendy are Raist are going to yell at you, and call you names.

And?  Like we haven't disagreed on things before?

I think Raist and Wendy are grown up enough to debate a topic without acting like a /b/tard noob in angry ranting.

Quote from: WardoggKC130FE on March 10, 2009, 10:27:32 AM

Quote from: Ravenwood240 on March 10, 2009, 10:14:36 AM

I don't think abortion is the first answer you need to be looking at any time something like this happens.

Watch out Raven, Wendy are Raist are going to yell at you, and call you names.

And?  Like we haven't disagreed on things before?

I think Raist and Wendy are grown up enough to debate a topic without acting like a /b/tard noob in angry ranting.

Really? Interesting.

I would like to see the evidence that someone who is 80 pound could have twins at 24 weeks with minimum danger to her. you suggest the doctors acted in haste. How long should they have spent on it. Just because they did not spend along time on it does not mean the answer was made in haste.

I would like to see the evidence that someone who is 80 pound could have twins at 24 weeks with minimum danger to her. you suggest the doctors acted in haste. How long should they have spent on it. Just because they did not spend along time on it does not mean the answer was made in haste.

Long enough for an amino at least?  Granted, without the x-rays and tests they performed I cannot know if it was safe, but they didn't once say that the girl was in danger now, only if she carried to term.

Big difference between 24 weeks and full term.

The parents took her to the hospital because she was in pain.  At 15 weeks a normal pregnancy should not be causing  pain.  You assume these doctors acted in haste, while ignoring the fact that Brazil has some of the strictest abortion laws in the world.  The doctors had to be certain the girl's life was in danger before performing the abortion, or they would have faced criminal charges.  Would you rather they wait until the girl is in imminent danger before doing the abortion?  Jesus, where's the compassion for a little girl who has been raped repeatedly?  She should be allowed to get over this and get on with her life as quickly and painlessly as possible. 

And wtf?  I can't believe you'd rather she carried the twins until they were barely viable, just to avoid an abortion.  Premature babies have a lot of problems anyway, I can only imagine what kinds of problems these twins would have been "born" with coming from an 80lb child.  Do we need more retards in the world?

The parents took her to the hospital because she was in pain.  At 15 weeks a normal pregnancy should not be causing  pain.  You assume these doctors acted in haste, while ignoring the fact that Brazil has some of the strictest abortion laws in the world.  The doctors had to be certain the girl's life was in danger before performing the abortion, or they would have faced criminal charges.  Would you rather they wait until the girl is in imminent danger before doing the abortion?  Jesus, where's the compassion for a little girl who has been raped repeatedly?  She should be allowed to get over this and get on with her life as quickly and painlessly as possible. 

And wtf?  I can't believe you'd rather she carried the twins until they were barely viable, just to avoid an abortion.  Premature babies have a lot of problems anyway, I can only imagine what kinds of problems these twins would have been "born" with coming from an 80lb child.  Do we need more retards in the world?

"The controversy erupted when media reported that a nine-year-old girl from the northeastern Brazilian state of Pernambuco had had an abortion to remove twin fetuses. The girl and her family learned she was 15 weeks pregnant when she went to hospital complaining of pains.

The girl, who has not been identified, told authorities her step-father had sexually abused her since age six. The 23-year-old step-father is currently in police custody.

Doctors performed the abortion Wednesday, saying they feared the pregnancy could kill her because of her slim frame."

Check your medicine at the door, SCG.  Premature babies are at greater risk for Autism, not retardation.

I would also like to know what sources you are reading from.  The doctors never claimed she was in danger at this time, not once in the article the OP did.  Nor does the article say that the pregnancy would hurt her, merely the delivery.

Nor does the article say anything about the pregnancy being painful for the girl.  From that article, she could have had hemorrhoids, since all it says is that she had pains.  Hell, she could have had shin splints.

Compassion for the girl?  Where's the compassion for two innocent lives destroyed before they ever had a chance?  That girl has at least lived, which is more than you can say for those kids, isn't it?  Would seven weeks have been so much to ask?

I don't know.  And neither do you.  Without seeing the records and knowing exactly what was going on with the girl and the babies, the question is moot.

If she was not in immediate danger, they could have waited and given those children a chance.

If she was, then you have to weigh the risks to both patient and fetus.

But without knowing her medical condition at the time of the procedure, neither of us can make that call.

I can. Kill the entire village and the local church.

Abortion may be wrong, but murder is still ok,,, right?

I can. Kill the entire village and the local church.

Abortion may be wrong, but murder is still ok,,, right?

I don't think so, ask a catholic.

Quote from: theonlydann on March 10, 2009, 12:18:21 PM

I can. Kill the entire village and the local church.

Abortion may be wrong, but murder is still ok,,, right?

I don't think so, ask a catholic.

I have a cross tattooed on my chest. Does that make me a religious authority? I think it does. Also, i was baptized catholic.

So yes. Yes it is.

Can anyone find a source on this that give more in depth description about why they chose to do an abortion. I couldn't find anything with Google that gave any in depth info. However the fact it said that the pregnancy itself could be dangerous to her says a little about it.

Can anyone find a source on this that give more in depth description about why they chose to do an abortion. I couldn't find anything with Google that gave any in depth info. However the fact it said that the pregnancy itself could be dangerous to her says a little about it.

The only real articles I found were in Spanish and I don't read it.  The babel fish translation was shit.

Pregnancy is dangerous to everyone.  Her age, size and youth made it more so for her, but the article we have doesn't say enough about it to judge accurately if it was immediately dangerous or just dangerous in the long term.

They erred, that much we agree on.  I don't think abortion is the first answer you need to be looking at any time something like this happens.

I wonder how much of that haste was because the girl's family couldn't pay for the care it would have taken?

That second link I posted a minute ago showed that Brazil has a long history of giving better care to private patients and allowing those that can't pay for C sections to suffer long beyond any point that would be acceptable in America or most countries.

Had that girl been rich enough to pay for seven weeks of pampered care in a private room and the C section... would that have changed their minds?

That is neither here nor there. The treatment she would have received if she was rich is not what the catholic church should be basing its decision on. She wasn't rich and should not be punished for her poverty.

Compassion for the girl?  Where's the compassion for two innocent lives destroyed before they ever had a chance?  That girl has at least lived, which is more than you can say for those kids, isn't it?  Would seven weeks have been so much to ask?

So you value two unborn fetuses over a living, breathing 9 year old girl who has been sexually abused since age six? Wow. Just wow.

Do you seriously think these children would have lasted long after birth? Especially being born into a poverty stricken family, you would prefer it if this poor young girl brought these two other kids into such a world where they aren't even wanted? What kind of lives do you think these twins would have? If anything, the doctors prevented unnecessary suffering on both ends. People love to talk about the "right to life"; "THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO LIVE!!" but never see past what would most likely happen after the birthing process;

The little girl would have most likely died.

Even if she didn't and the birthing process was successful, she would have to go through immense pain before it was all over. And I don't know about you, but asking that from a little 9 year old girl who has been repeatidly raped by her step father for years is pretty fuckin' heartless.

The babies would have been born into a family that most likely couldn't support them, which would most likely result in them either being put up for adoption (living in foster homes isn't exactly a fabulous life) or starving to death. Big win for pro-lifers eh? >_>

Quote from: optimisticcynic on March 10, 2009, 12:41:21 PM

Can anyone find a source on this that give more in depth description about why they chose to do an abortion. I couldn't find anything with Google that gave any in depth info. However the fact it said that the pregnancy itself could be dangerous to her says a little about it.

The only real articles I found were in Spanish and I don't read it.  The babel fish translation was shit.

Pregnancy is dangerous to everyone.  Her age, size and youth made it more so for her, but the article we have doesn't say enough about it to judge accurately if it was immediately dangerous or just dangerous in the long term.

Are you it was Spanish? Brazil speaks Portages I believe.

Quote from: Ravenwood240 on March 10, 2009, 12:57:07 PM

Quote from: optimisticcynic on March 10, 2009, 12:41:21 PM

Can anyone find a source on this that give more in depth description about why they chose to do an abortion. I couldn't find anything with Google that gave any in depth info. However the fact it said that the pregnancy itself could be dangerous to her says a little about it.

The only real articles I found were in Spanish and I don't read it.  The babel fish translation was shit.

Pregnancy is dangerous to everyone.  Her age, size and youth made it more so for her, but the article we have doesn't say enough about it to judge accurately if it was immediately dangerous or just dangerous in the long term.

Are you it was Spanish? Brazil speaks Portages I believe.

Lol. new meme?

They do speak spanish though, it's just not their native tongue or their national language.. and they get very offended if you talk to them in spanish.

Quote from: Space Cowgirl on March 10, 2009, 11:22:04 AM

The parents took her to the hospital because she was in pain.  At 15 weeks a normal pregnancy should not be causing  pain.  You assume these doctors acted in haste, while ignoring the fact that Brazil has some of the strictest abortion laws in the world.  The doctors had to be certain the girl's life was in danger before performing the abortion, or they would have faced criminal charges.  Would you rather they wait until the girl is in imminent danger before doing the abortion?  Jesus, where's the compassion for a little girl who has been raped repeatedly?  She should be allowed to get over this and get on with her life as quickly and painlessly as possible. 

And wtf?  I can't believe you'd rather she carried the twins until they were barely viable, just to avoid an abortion.  Premature babies have a lot of problems anyway, I can only imagine what kinds of problems these twins would have been "born" with coming from an 80lb child.  Do we need more retards in the world?

"The controversy erupted when media reported that a nine-year-old girl from the northeastern Brazilian state of Pernambuco had had an abortion to remove twin fetuses. The girl and her family learned she was 15 weeks pregnant when she went to hospital complaining of pains.

The girl, who has not been identified, told authorities her step-father had sexually abused her since age six. The 23-year-old step-father is currently in police custody.

Doctors performed the abortion Wednesday, saying they feared the pregnancy could kill her because of her slim frame."

Check your medicine at the door, SCG.  Premature babies are at greater risk for Autism, not retardation.

I would also like to know what sources you are reading from.  The doctors never claimed she was in danger at this time, not once in the article the OP did.  Nor does the article say that the pregnancy would hurt her, merely the delivery.

Nor does the article say anything about the pregnancy being painful for the girl.  From that article, she could have had hemorrhoids, since all it says is that she had pains.  Hell, she could have had shin splints.

Compassion for the girl?  Where's the compassion for two innocent lives destroyed before they ever had a chance?  That girl has at least lived, which is more than you can say for those kids, isn't it?  Would seven weeks have been so much to ask?

I don't know.  And neither do you.  Without seeing the records and knowing exactly what was going on with the girl and the babies, the question is moot.

If she was not in immediate danger, they could have waited and given those children a chance.

If she was, then you have to weigh the risks to both patient and fetus.

But without knowing her medical condition at the time of the procedure, neither of us can make that call.

They're not going to administer a pregnancy test to a 9 yr old with fucking hemorrhoids or shinsplints, dipshit.  She was having pains, which led them to do a pregnancy test.  Think about the kind of pain a child would have to suffer before a doctor would consider administering a pregnancy test.  I'm beginning to doubt that you are female.

Fetuses are not kids, they are fetuses. That 9yr old girl is a kid, and her life was in danger, now it isn't.  I will make the call that says she deserves to be a child, and that she doesn't deserve to suffer another day, let alone 7 more weeks.  She doesn't deserve to be tortured another minute of her life.  She'd have to lie in bed for all that time, then she'd have to undergo major surgery to cut out two premature babies that most likely wouldn't survive, and if they did they wouldn't have much of a chance at a productive life.  On top of that, she could die during the procedure.  I have a lot more compassion for the "two innocent lives" than you do.  I say they are much better off having never been born.  IF there is a god, then those "two innocent lives" should be in heaven right about now. 
 

I have to say a 15 week old fetuses are not children yet. They are the possibility of a human life. second those 7 short weeks the baby grows by a factor of 7. If the baby's were causing pain at the 15 week mark at the 24 week mark how much more damage could it be doing.

Sorry I called you a dipshit, Raven.  I really couldn't believe you would think they'd do a pregnancy test on a 9 yr old with shinsplints or hemorrhoids.  I still don't believe it, but you aren't a dipshit. 

I love how Raven gets normal debate and I get "AASRGHGHG you suck you fucking dumbass" even though we are on the same side.  Guess it pays to have tits after all.


It makes me giggle.

when do the rights of the fetus superceed the rights to life and well being of the mother?  Who decides when the life of the mother is in enough danger to merit stripping the rights of the fetus?  The mother?  The doctor? The lawmakers? or the Vatican? 

I love how Raven gets normal debate and I get "AASRGHGHG you suck you fucking dumbass" even though we are on the same side.  Guess it pays to have tits after all.

They debated with you as much as anyone can. The fact that Raven is actually capable of a civil discussion is why there appears to be rational inconsistency. Both of you were attacked personally, so I don't see why you're crying "special treatment" all of a sudden.

Who decides when the life of the mother is in enough danger to merit stripping the rights of the fetus?  The mother?  The doctor? The lawmakers? or the Vatican? 

The doctors, obviously.

Quote from: WardoggKC130FE on March 10, 2009, 06:53:58 PM

I love how Raven gets normal debate and I get "AASRGHGHG you suck you fucking dumbass" even though we are on the same side.  Guess it pays to have tits after all.

They debated with you as much as anyone can.

Really? Start with my second post in this thread and then read all replies and tell me I was treated with the same respect.  (minus the dipshit comment which was apologized for)
 

Not that I give a fuck.  I find the duality funny.

Quote from: Proleg on March 10, 2009, 07:38:50 PM

Quote from: WardoggKC130FE on March 10, 2009, 06:53:58 PM

I love how Raven gets normal debate and I get "AASRGHGHG you suck you fucking dumbass" even though we are on the same side.  Guess it pays to have tits after all.

They debated with you as much as anyone can.

Really? Start with my second post in this thread and then read all replies and tell me I was treated with the same respect.  (minus the dipshit comment which was apologized for)
 

Not that I give a fuck.  I find the duality funny.

I see no insults except when you just post an opinion (which is frequent). Everyone who responded addressed your posts fully. You were hardly dismissed with a "AASRGHGHG you suck you fucking dumbass".

I see no insults except when you just post an opinion (which is frequent). Everyone who responded addressed your posts fully. You were hardly dismissed with a "AASRGHGHG you suck you fucking dumbass".

Yeah you're right, this never happened.

Fuck off warrdog. You have no excuse for siding that way in this debate. Sick fuck.

or this

Now if you are willing to admit you are a pedophile I'll apologize.

and apparently I drug Wendy into this from another conversation.  So I apologize to Wendy.

Do you realize there's more to those posts than that?

Yeah you're right, this never happened.

Quote from: Raist on March 08, 2009, 09:21:10 PM

Fuck off warrdog. You have no excuse for siding that way in this debate. Sick fuck.

He is just mad because to him it is ironic that a 'baby killer' thinks abortion is wrong.  Just thought I would point that out.

He is just mad because to him it is ironic that a 'baby killer' thinks abortion is wrong.  Just thought I would point that out.

Yeah, sad really.

Do you realize there's more to those posts than that?

Yup, but find that sort of aggression towards Raven in any of the other posts(besides the one already pointed out.)