This was a dialogue I felt I had to weigh in to. It was on a photo posted on Matt Krauses Public Facebook Page. It shows the total ignorance of Abortion Advocates. My response is at the bottom.
Top of Form
Matt Krause
Like This PageLiked · 6 hours ago
Honored to stand with Gov. Perry and other pro-life legislators at today's HB 2 signing. A great day for Texas and its posterity!
As the son of an RN who has spent her entire life working with Mom's and Babies in Postpartum and in Delivery let me weigh in here. There some, but very few, instances where an abortion has any medical necessity. It is the governments’ duty to preserve life. It is the duty of all practicing Doctors to preserve life.
Let’s define “abortion” and “early delivery” as two different things.
Abortion often involves cutting and tearing apart the unborn child piece by piece, while living in order to cause violent and painful death to the unborn child.
Early Delivery then would be an alternative. If it becomes medically necessary to deliver early and “terminate” the pregnancy, the alternative, typically not practiced by abortion advocate doctors, would be to deliver the child, natural or C-Section, whole and as alive as it can be and then allow nature to take it’s course. Many children have been born premature and lived much earlier than doctors believed they would. It’s also the job of doctors to preserve life so that newly born child would then require all medically available intervention to prevent it’s death. IF, and only IF, at that point the child dies we can say that it Medicine and Law served their role to protect life.
“Abortion” defined as the purposeful destruction of a living being, has NO medical, moral, or legal case. It should be outlawed in whole at all stages of pregnancy. The child has a brain and heart before most women know their pregnant. “Life: brain waves, heart pumping, and other signs of life” begin early on in the first trimester.
If medical necessity is determined this would require “Early Delivery”, NOT “Abortion”.
Moral:
The Moral debate on this subject is another matter and simply put:
What does any human in the USA have the right to choose? Does a mother have the right to choose to kill her 17 YEAR old son if he causes her inconvenience or she “chooses” to? What moral difference is there between killing a 17 year old and a 17 week old and a 17 hour old? At what point does that human being get rights? Abortion advocates are not fighting FOR women, they are fighting AGAINST children.
Also study after study show that Abortion on the whole has done more harm to women physically and emotionally than it has ever done anyone any good. The Abortion Industry is a multi-billion dollar business and it preys on women at a vulnerable point in their lives and pressures them into making this decision more often than not. Many who try to back out are discouraged from backing out and pressured to continue. Places like Planned Parenthood rarely provide any of the very viable alternatives to Abortion to these women. Those that fight for Abortion are fighting to preserve a business that makes them a lot of money and violates women on many levels. Fighting abortion is a fight FOR women and FOR children.
It is Abortion advocates that hate women and children and use them for their own profits.
One man’s opinion, Darrell G. Wolfe http://N2GS.Blogspot.Com Bottom of Form
Top of Form
Matt Krause
Honored to stand with Gov. Perry and other pro-life legislators at today's HB 2 signing. A great day for Texas and its posterity!Bottom of Form
Like This PageLiked · 6 hours ago
Honored to stand with Gov. Perry and other pro-life legislators at today's HB 2 signing. A great day for Texas and its posterity!
Jeff Plaga "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...". You are restricting a woman's right to do as her religion deems acceptable based off of your religious beliefs.
about an hour ago via mobile · Like
Matt Krause That doesn't endorse the idea of separation of church and state. All that says is that there can be no official state religion. There is no reference in the Constitution that implicates a wall, and our founding father's actions do not support such a p...See More
about an hour ago · Unlike · 2
Jeff Plaga Yes as a Jefferson historian I am very well versed on where the phrase "separation of church and state" originated. But you are restricting someone to perform a perfectly acceptable medical procedure based on your religious beliefs. However, the suprem...See More
about an hour ago via mobile · Like
Matt Krause With abortion, it is not just a woman and her doctor. There is a third person involved and the government has a duty to ensure that a person's life, liberty, or property is not deprived without due process of law. It is a perfectly legitimate act of th...See More
about an hour ago · Unlike · 2
Jeff Plaga I agree there is a limit as to when a woman should be allowed to have an abortion and the MEDICAL community should be the one making that decision. But why are you restricting access to places that perform abortion? And don't say it is for the safety of women because your leader, Rick Perry, already stated that this bill was designed to ultimately outlaw abortion.
56 minutes ago via mobile · Like
Darrell G. Wolfe Medical:
As the son of an RN who has spent her entire life working with Mom's and Babies in Postpartum and in Delivery let me weigh in here. There some, but very few, instances where an abortion has any medical necessity. It is the governments’ duty to preserve life. It is the duty of all practicing Doctors to preserve life.
Let’s define “abortion” and “early delivery” as two different things.
Abortion often involves cutting and tearing apart the unborn child piece by piece, while living in order to cause violent and painful death to the unborn child.
Early Delivery then would be an alternative. If it becomes medically necessary to deliver early and “terminate” the pregnancy, the alternative, typically not practiced by abortion advocate doctors, would be to deliver the child, natural or C-Section, whole and as alive as it can be and then allow nature to take it’s course. Many children have been born premature and lived much earlier than doctors believed they would. It’s also the job of doctors to preserve life so that newly born child would then require all medically available intervention to prevent it’s death. IF, and only IF, at that point the child dies we can say that it Medicine and Law served their role to protect life.
“Abortion” defined as the purposeful destruction of a living being, has NO medical, moral, or legal case. It should be outlawed in whole at all stages of pregnancy. The child has a brain and heart before most women know their pregnant. “Life: brain waves, heart pumping, and other signs of life” begin early on in the first trimester.
If medical necessity is determined this would require “Early Delivery”, NOT “Abortion”.
Moral:
The Moral debate on this subject is another matter and simply put:
What does any human in the USA have the right to choose? Does a mother have the right to choose to kill her 17 YEAR old son if he causes her inconvenience or she “chooses” to? What moral difference is there between killing a 17 year old and a 17 week old and a 17 hour old? At what point does that human being get rights? Abortion advocates are not fighting FOR women, they are fighting AGAINST children.
Also study after study show that Abortion on the whole has done more harm to women physically and emotionally than it has ever done anyone any good. The Abortion Industry is a multi-billion dollar business and it preys on women at a vulnerable point in their lives and pressures them into making this decision more often than not. Many who try to back out are discouraged from backing out and pressured to continue. Places like Planned Parenthood rarely provide any of the very viable alternatives to Abortion to these women. Those that fight for Abortion are fighting to preserve a business that makes them a lot of money and violates women on many levels. Fighting abortion is a fight FOR women and FOR children.
It is Abortion advocates that hate women and children and use them for their own profits.
One man’s opinion, Darrell G. Wolfe http://N2GS.Blogspot.Com
As the son of an RN who has spent her entire life working with Mom's and Babies in Postpartum and in Delivery let me weigh in here. There some, but very few, instances where an abortion has any medical necessity. It is the governments’ duty to preserve life. It is the duty of all practicing Doctors to preserve life.
Let’s define “abortion” and “early delivery” as two different things.
Abortion often involves cutting and tearing apart the unborn child piece by piece, while living in order to cause violent and painful death to the unborn child.
Early Delivery then would be an alternative. If it becomes medically necessary to deliver early and “terminate” the pregnancy, the alternative, typically not practiced by abortion advocate doctors, would be to deliver the child, natural or C-Section, whole and as alive as it can be and then allow nature to take it’s course. Many children have been born premature and lived much earlier than doctors believed they would. It’s also the job of doctors to preserve life so that newly born child would then require all medically available intervention to prevent it’s death. IF, and only IF, at that point the child dies we can say that it Medicine and Law served their role to protect life.
“Abortion” defined as the purposeful destruction of a living being, has NO medical, moral, or legal case. It should be outlawed in whole at all stages of pregnancy. The child has a brain and heart before most women know their pregnant. “Life: brain waves, heart pumping, and other signs of life” begin early on in the first trimester.
If medical necessity is determined this would require “Early Delivery”, NOT “Abortion”.
Moral:
The Moral debate on this subject is another matter and simply put:
What does any human in the USA have the right to choose? Does a mother have the right to choose to kill her 17 YEAR old son if he causes her inconvenience or she “chooses” to? What moral difference is there between killing a 17 year old and a 17 week old and a 17 hour old? At what point does that human being get rights? Abortion advocates are not fighting FOR women, they are fighting AGAINST children.
Also study after study show that Abortion on the whole has done more harm to women physically and emotionally than it has ever done anyone any good. The Abortion Industry is a multi-billion dollar business and it preys on women at a vulnerable point in their lives and pressures them into making this decision more often than not. Many who try to back out are discouraged from backing out and pressured to continue. Places like Planned Parenthood rarely provide any of the very viable alternatives to Abortion to these women. Those that fight for Abortion are fighting to preserve a business that makes them a lot of money and violates women on many levels. Fighting abortion is a fight FOR women and FOR children.
It is Abortion advocates that hate women and children and use them for their own profits.
One man’s opinion, Darrell G. Wolfe http://N2GS.Blogspot.Com
n2gs.blogspot.com
A blog written to help people into Good Success in every area of their lives, Spiritual, Physical, and Financial.
Bottom of Form
For those who cannot see the photo:
Medical:
As the son of an RN who has spent her entire life working with Mom's and Babies in Postpartum and in Delivery let me weigh in here. There some, but very few, instances where an abortion has any medical necessity. It is the governments’ duty to preserve life. It is the duty of all practicing Doctors to preserve life.
Let’s define “abortion” and “early delivery” as two different things.
Abortion often involves cutting and tearing apart the unborn child piece by piece, while living in order to cause violent and painful death to the unborn child.
Early Delivery then would be an alternative. If it becomes medically necessary to deliver early and “terminate” the pregnancy, the alternative, typically not practiced by abortion advocate doctors, would be to deliver the child, natural or C-Section, whole and as alive as it can be and then allow nature to take it’s course. Many children have been born premature and lived much earlier than doctors believed they would. It’s also the job of doctors to preserve life so that newly born child would then require all medically available intervention to prevent it’s death. IF, and only IF, at that point the child dies we can say that it Medicine and Law served their role to protect life.
“Abortion” defined as the purposeful destruction of a living being, has NO medical, moral, or legal case. It should be outlawed in whole at all stages of pregnancy. The child has a brain and heart before most women know their pregnant. “Life: brain waves, heart pumping, and other signs of life” begin early on in the first trimester.
If medical necessity is determined this would require “Early Delivery”, NOT “Abortion”.
Moral:
The Moral debate on this subject is another matter and simply put:
What does any human in the USA have the right to choose? Does a mother have the right to choose to kill her 17 YEAR old son if he causes her inconvenience or she “chooses” to? What moral difference is there between killing a 17 year old and a 17 week old and a 17 hour old? At what point does that human being get rights? Abortion advocates are not fighting FOR women, they are fighting AGAINST children.
Also study after study show that Abortion on the whole has done more harm to women physically and emotionally than it has ever done anyone any good. The Abortion Industry is a multi-billion dollar business and it preys on women at a vulnerable point in their lives and pressures them into making this decision more often than not. Many who try to back out are discouraged from backing out and pressured to continue. Places like Planned Parenthood rarely provide any of the very viable alternatives to Abortion to these women. Those that fight for Abortion are fighting to preserve a business that makes them a lot of money and violates women on many levels. Fighting abortion is a fight FOR women and FOR children.
It is Abortion advocates that hate women and children and use them for their own profits.
Have questions about anything I said here? Want to share your story? Comment Below!
I call you empowered 2 prosper with good success!
N2 Good SuccessDarrell G. Wolfe
Blog: http://n2gs.blogspot.com/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/n2goodsuccess
Twitter: http://twitter.com/n2goodsuccess
See Also:
Books by Darrell G. Wolfe: Amazon.com/author/darrellgwolfe
Book Suggestions from the N2 Good Success Amazon Store
Brand and Product Offerings from N2 Good Success Zazzle Store
___
Movements
ReplyDeleteSpontaneous movements begin at seven weeks:
"By 45 days, about the time of the mother's second missed period, the baby's skeleton is complete in cartilage, not bone, at first; ... he makes the first movements of his body and new-grown limbs, although it will be another 12 weeks before his movements are strong enough to be transmitted through the insensitive uterus to be detected by the mother's sensitive abdominal wall."4
Brain function
Brain waves have been recorded by EEG (electro- encephalograph) in the human embryo 40 days after fertilisation.
http://www.spuc.org.uk/education/abortion/human-development#first