[chootsonege]

Typical BS from religion.

[CHEAPSOFTOEMONLINE]

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q...aCBYZkaA&pli=1

Look at the date on that sucker. 2004. He was advocating for abortion legalization in Brazil during the Johannesburg conference. Odd that. One would presume that his support of abortion has nothing at all to do with this case here, and everything to do with the fact that he's an abortion doctor who stands to profit greatly.

Why am I not surprised?

[StanWatts]

Ben it's not really safe for a 9 year old mother to deliver a child.

[hauptdaunnila]

Ben it's not really safe for a 9 year old mother to deliver a child. And it's not really safe for her to have an abortion either. What happens if he perforates her uterus? She could have delivered by c-section. The abortion doctor doesn't even state how far along she was in the pregnancy.

[shodulsilfeli]

Ben it's common sense that it isn't healthy or safe for a child that young to have a baby. Why then doesn't the abortion doctor state how far along she was? If her children were older than 25 weeks, she could have delivered via c-section. No abortion necessary.

[AlistDakisa]

And by "this," I mean the subject of the OP, the thread, and basically everything connected to it. Especially BK.

[ruforumczspam]

Especially BK. Elok is not amused by someone who treats his faith seriously.

[KongoSan]

The Christian solution to abortion is to kill the child after it is born.

[Peabelilt]

For the record, I'm also not amused by the apparent glee with which Moby reported the story. "Oooh, a gruesome tale of child-rape, abortion, and injustice! I can't wait to use it to score cheap points off the most-easily-scored-on poster on this site!"

Of course, that pales in comparison to BK's ongoing effort to defend the utterly indefensible, but everybody was pointing that out, so...

[infollafago]

BK's ongoing effort to defend the utterly indefensible Taking the child into the hospital and caring for her and her children, and giving her a c-section when the time comes to help her safely deliver her children is indefensible?

[AlekseyZubkov]

Taking the child into the hospital and caring for her and her children, and giving her a c-section when the time comes to help her safely deliver her children is indefensible?

The majority of doctors agreed that a 9 year old cannot birth twins without tremendous risk to her or the twins.

It's indefensible to put her at tremendous risk because her Catholic step-father raped her repeatedly for years.

[hojutok]

Why then doesn't the abortion doctor state how far along she was? If her children were older than 25 weeks, she could have delivered via c-section. No abortion necessary.

Read the article. It says she was four months pregnant. The fetuses weren't viable.

[Jasonstawnosaa]

I don't know the details, but this could have been a medical emergency where waiting for over a month wouldn't have been acceptable. A girl who's only nine and has twins? It's very plausible.

[pooncophy]

Really, why do you guys bother?

ACK!

[natahololll]

I don't know the details, but this could have been a medical emergency where waiting for over a month wouldn't have been acceptable. A girl who's only nine and has twins? It's very plausible. That was my question earlier. What's the medical emergency? What's the rush to get the abortion done? Why not wait and deliver the babies via c-section?

[phsyalcvqh]

For the record, I'm also not amused by the apparent glee with which Moby reported the story. "Oooh, a gruesome tale of child-rape, abortion, and injustice! I can't wait to use it to score cheap points off the most-easily-scored-on poster on this site!"

Of course, that pales in comparison to BK's ongoing effort to defend the utterly indefensible, but everybody was pointing that out, so...

This. I agree with this.

[viagracheapest]

People more than disagree with you, Ben. You are reprehensible and a sad human being.

[Jeaxatoem]

People more than disagree with you, Ben. You are reprehensible and a sad human being. Let's get this straight. I'm reprehensible because I want to save the lives of both of her children in the womb? Really? If it can be done safely, and medical experts who are trained in this field say this can be done, why not?

[Vodonaeva]

Let's get this straight. I'm reprehensible because I want to save the lives of both of her children in the womb? Really? If it can be done safely, and medical experts who are trained in this field say this can be done, why not?

Because the vast majority agree it could not be done.

You would risk the life of the raped mother to bring a small chance of survival to the offspring of rape.

[freediscountplanrrxip]

Because the vast majority agree it could not be done. Then why is a licensed obstetician and not an abortion doctor saying that it can be done? This is why they get second opinions from people who don't have a vested interest in doing abortions.

You would risk the life of the raped mother to bring a small chance of survival to the offspring of rape. I trust the opinion of the doctors who have far more experience in these sorts of things, that it can be done safely with less risk than the average pregnancy. I don't call that a small chance of the survival of the mother or her children. I'm talking almost certainly being able to save all three.

Also - the chance of abortion killing the mother, is not negligible either. It's a significant risk that needs to be taken into consideration. If you would kill the mother and her two children through abortion - how are you doing anything to help her?