Soldato
- Joined
- 9 Jun 2005
- Posts
- 4,698
- Location
- Wiltshire
"Christian in against abortion shocker"
I think its a good idea, should probably have kept it quiet though.
Aborted Babies incinerated to heat Hospital!!
- Thread starter koolpc
- Start date
"Christian in against abortion shocker"
I think its a good idea, should probably have kept it quiet though.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 32,911
- Location
- Rutland
The morning after pill kills the embryo - murder?
Smoking in pregnancy and increasing your miscarriage rate - murder?
Morning after pill prevents the embryo from attaching itself to the womb, that's the point when i think it become a viable life
Yes of course it is, a mother should know better then not to smoke, drink or take drugs while pregnant. A natural miscarriage when the mother was trying to look after herself is the body rejecting the embryo because it wasn't viable, so that's not Murder, that's biology
But they do have a cremation? OK minus the ceremony part... but seriously, it would be a bit odd to have a ceremony to commemorate the passing of an organism that was, in most cases, killed off out of choice by its potential future mother.
I agree that very very late stage abortions are a bit dubious but for a large enough portion of them its not yet a sentient being. Do you morn for the loss of millions of lives when you've had a ****?
What essentially becomes clinical waste is disposed of as per other clinical waste... and making use of sources of heat such as incinerators for heating etc.. seems like a reasonable idea.
This thread is just going to be like urinating in the wind, and no minds will be changed no matter how compelling you make your argument.
Welcome to the forums.
So a woman gets raped and becomes pregnant with a baby that tests show will have severe disabilities. Do you think the 'right' thing to do here is to force a woman who has been raped to have the child and then the child to suffer a life (if it can be called that) of physical and/or mental disability?
I know this is an extreme and unlikely example but I'm trying to make the point that in some cases abortion is the right thing to do.
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Dec 2002
- Posts
- 2,951
I don't see the problem, they are not chucking babies on a bonfire and toasting marshmallows.
There is probably a heat exchanger in the furnace used to cremate medical waste, no matter how green you go I don't think babies have a fantastic calorific value as a sole means of fuel. The gas on the other hand used to fuel said furnace...
Edit: AFAIK the energy required to incinerate something in the medical sense uses more energy than what was contained in what was incinerated, so, if you think about it incinerating babies is a really **** way of heating your hospital.
There is probably a heat exchanger in the furnace used to cremate medical waste, no matter how green you go I don't think babies have a fantastic calorific value as a sole means of fuel. The gas on the other hand used to fuel said furnace...
Edit: AFAIK the energy required to incinerate something in the medical sense uses more energy than what was contained in what was incinerated, so, if you think about it incinerating babies is a really **** way of heating your hospital.
Last edited:
And that's the ""Million Dollar Question"".
You might think it's then, but there are arguments for pretty much every time from conception to birth.
It just not clear cut, no matter what anyone or any religion says.
Having just read the article, I can safely say its a load of sensationalist nonsense. Why do I know this? Lets look at the facts:
To dispose of ANY potential foetus requires compliance with very strict human tissues act guidelines. I've highlighted potential foetus as most samples that hospital histopathology laboratories handle are called "products of conception" and are often just haemorrhagic clots of old blood which have to be screened for chorionic villi (which confirms or denies pregnancy).
When receiving a sample, it ALWAYS has to have a signed and dated consent form which has a patient indentifier for the mother, the fathers name if known, the gestational age and exact time of "birth", name + profession and signature of the staff member who filled out the form, doctors signature and name + professional status, method of disposal which include the remains released to the parents for private service or cremation through the trust with the ashes being returned to them as example options. Finally, the usual date of birth/address etc has to be on every form and there are multiple copies. The histopathology department cannot legally accept any POC samples that don't have these forms due to HTA rules.
Due to that, I can't see how the hospital would simply get aware with cremating hundreds of bodies with no records. Due to that, I'm inclined to agree with the hospitals press release stating that the story is basically crud.
To dispose of ANY potential foetus requires compliance with very strict human tissues act guidelines. I've highlighted potential foetus as most samples that hospital histopathology laboratories handle are called "products of conception" and are often just haemorrhagic clots of old blood which have to be screened for chorionic villi (which confirms or denies pregnancy).
When receiving a sample, it ALWAYS has to have a signed and dated consent form which has a patient indentifier for the mother, the fathers name if known, the gestational age and exact time of "birth", name + profession and signature of the staff member who filled out the form, doctors signature and name + professional status, method of disposal which include the remains released to the parents for private service or cremation through the trust with the ashes being returned to them as example options. Finally, the usual date of birth/address etc has to be on every form and there are multiple copies. The histopathology department cannot legally accept any POC samples that don't have these forms due to HTA rules.
Due to that, I can't see how the hospital would simply get aware with cremating hundreds of bodies with no records. Due to that, I'm inclined to agree with the hospitals press release stating that the story is basically crud.
Not clear cut to them, but it is to me. I don't particularly care for the debate when it becomes viable because i have in my mind a clear cut point.
As for the rape/deformed baby question. The woman should seek the morning after pill after rape and if she is pregnant they sorry but yes. Disabled doesn't mean they cannot contribute to society, Stephen Hawking anyone? Doesn't get much more disabled then that!
Caporegime
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 32,911
- Location
- Rutland
You live in a fantasy world.
^This
Speaking as someone who supports abortion, I think your post is rather unfair.
You're attributing the motivations and beliefs of SOME pro-lifers to ALL pro-lifers.
So you really don't see any situation where abortion should be considered acceptable?
Caporegime
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 32,911
- Location
- Rutland
What if it has a lethal or life limiting defect?
To the baby? As distasteful to you as it seems, let nature take it's course, my mums first born was still born. Back then you wouldn't know these things but i know my mum would have given him a chance if there was a slim chance of survival. There have been cases where the foetus was branded deformed or severely disabled but when born, turned out to be a perfectly healthy baby.
Who are you to decide if a life is worth living or not, seems like to me the pro-abortionists are the ones who are coming across as selfish.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 32,911
- Location
- Rutland
You're bonkers - so if a baby has anencephaly (no head) or any other fatal anomaly you would expect a woman to complete the pregnancy and go through birth (not without risk) just to appease your beliefs?
It's the doctors job to decide in conjunction with the parents. Sometimes providing the most considerate and humane care you can provide is to terminate the pregnancy. This wimpy "who are we to judge" nonsense is pathetic indecision that leads to suffering.
It's the doctors job to decide in conjunction with the parents. Sometimes providing the most considerate and humane care you can provide is to terminate the pregnancy. This wimpy "who are we to judge" nonsense is pathetic indecision that leads to suffering.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Oct 2003
- Posts
- 5,510
- Location
- Worthington-on-sea
Why?
And how does this differ from the mother's mental health in being forced to carry her rapist's baby to full term, or carry a child with a severe genetic abnormality that would mean it is guaranteed not to survive outside the womb or make it to full term?
And also robgmun, is it all life that you believe is sacred or just human life? If just human life, why? If all life, are you a vegetarian? Is plantlife also sacred?