Thoughts from providers on second trimester abortions
Jivin J at Jill Stanek's blog site read an amazing article posted at the Abortioneers blog. I recommend that you follow the second link FAST. Since the pro-lifers have spotted it, the article might not remain up for long, particularly if the comments start flying.
Below is what I left at Jill's blog, and in bold is what I asked of the Abortioneers at their blog.
I think it's worthwhile to understand the mental processes necessary to practice abortion.
It helps to understand where a lot of them come from, which is a state of hopelessness for women and children. Early on, the optimism about the possibility of women being revered and respected for their full natural potential has been stripped away. There is also the spectre of child abuse. From the chosen nics of some people speaking on the abortion issue, their own objectification from a very early age becomes starkly apparent.
Imagine starting and living your life in the middle of a battlefield with rape and carnage all around you. You might choose to end human suffering in the same way that these people choose to, by ending the life of the victim. In the cases of abortionists, their personal lives might have some kind of analogous beginning, or perhaps they received endless video or other stimuli to mimic this situation.
The article points out that human instinct rebels against killing one's own.
Some abortion workers quit, because the natural instinct becomes overwhelming, or they are given access to hope through contact with the Creator.
I'd choke my way through the article if I were you, so you can understand more on how the demand for abortion can be eliminated.
I don't dream that a lifetime of adverse conditions can be wiped away quickly. Also, our own choice to avoid participating in abortion or even to avoid abortion ourselves is soon to be curtailed by the cost constraints of socialized medicine. So I instead asked this question on the abortioneers forum:
Do you think that abortion practitioners and ancillary personnel should be allowed to choose whether or not to offer second and third trimester abortion services?
Does willingness to perform early procedures in any way negate a choice to refuse to perform later procedures?
Would you support legal provisions (such as exemptions from lawsuits or loss of license) for those who choose not to perform the later procedures?
Below is what I left at Jill's blog, and in bold is what I asked of the Abortioneers at their blog.
I think it's worthwhile to understand the mental processes necessary to practice abortion.
It helps to understand where a lot of them come from, which is a state of hopelessness for women and children. Early on, the optimism about the possibility of women being revered and respected for their full natural potential has been stripped away. There is also the spectre of child abuse. From the chosen nics of some people speaking on the abortion issue, their own objectification from a very early age becomes starkly apparent.
Imagine starting and living your life in the middle of a battlefield with rape and carnage all around you. You might choose to end human suffering in the same way that these people choose to, by ending the life of the victim. In the cases of abortionists, their personal lives might have some kind of analogous beginning, or perhaps they received endless video or other stimuli to mimic this situation.
The article points out that human instinct rebels against killing one's own.
Some abortion workers quit, because the natural instinct becomes overwhelming, or they are given access to hope through contact with the Creator.
I'd choke my way through the article if I were you, so you can understand more on how the demand for abortion can be eliminated.
I don't dream that a lifetime of adverse conditions can be wiped away quickly. Also, our own choice to avoid participating in abortion or even to avoid abortion ourselves is soon to be curtailed by the cost constraints of socialized medicine. So I instead asked this question on the abortioneers forum:
Do you think that abortion practitioners and ancillary personnel should be allowed to choose whether or not to offer second and third trimester abortion services?
Does willingness to perform early procedures in any way negate a choice to refuse to perform later procedures?
Would you support legal provisions (such as exemptions from lawsuits or loss of license) for those who choose not to perform the later procedures?
posted by pharmer1 | 2:57 PM
2 Comments:
How stupid are you, to think that the folks at Abortioneers would never have considered the possibility that shrieking harridans such as Jill Stanek might be reading their website, and might have to act quickly to hide their content upon finally having that realization?
Answer: pretty impressively stupid!
Newsflash: pro-choice values discourse, honesty, and facts. Don't project the anti-choice MO of dissembling, hysteria, and lies onto *us*.
Actually, I DID address that probabilty, right in my post. I guess you might have missed it.
Here it is again:
"I recommend that you follow the second link FAST. Since the pro-lifers have spotted it, the article might not remain up for long, particularly if the comments start flying."
Would you like to address any of the three serious questions I left at the abortioneers blog?
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home