Live Blog: Pro-Choice Messaging’s New Wave or Passing Ship?


Join Gloria Feldt and Sarah Stoesz on the 36th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, Thursday, January 22nd from 3-4pm EST for a live blog discussion about messaging and the reproductive rights movement.  

Gloria Feldt is a leading women’s activist and best selling author. She is a former President of Planned Parenthood Federation of America. You can find her writing on the web at www.GloriaFeldt.com. Her much-quoted Heartfeldt Politics Blog
offers a unique take on current events from where the political and
personal meet.

Sarah Stoesz is President and CEO of Planned Parenthood
Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota. Stoesz was a leader in the
campaign against South Dakota’s Measure 11 working tirelessly to defeat
the proposed abortion ban in November 2008.

Click ‘Replay’ button below to read the full transcript of the discussion.

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

  • http://.futureshaping.com/shostak invalid-0

    On the 2009 anniversary of Roe v. Wade it is incumbent on us to reconsider the neglect of waiting-room males in the nation’s abortion clinics and doctor’s offices. Over 600,000 annually sit nervously hoping for news a loved one is now available to leave, free from an ill-timed and unwanted pregnancy. Almost all have been kept from sharing comfort and love in either the procedure or recovery room. All have learned NOTHING about family planning and contraception, both subjects they urgently need help with (25% or so are repeater). We should rectify this sitation today, as it does us no honor: males can become a major partner i reducing the number of abortions, if given the care and education they need.

  • invalid-0

    1 out of 3 … is me

    blogging my elective second trimester abortion

    http://1outof3.blogspot.com/

  • invalid-0

    Why should males be concerned about abortion?

    • invalid-0

      …females they don’t feel they want to spend the rest of their lives with, should be very concerned about abortion and access to it. Look, we are a species of infinite choices and not all the ones we make are the result of careful planning, not that planning automatically negates unwanted pregnancy. As someone who has never been called upon to take someone to an abortion clinic, nor pay for one, I was torn about the idea of a person presumed to be part of the predicament kept at waiting room’s length.
      But it occurs to me, had “he” been a little more adamant/educated/prepared about having safe sex (and being a little less inebriated during sex) he wouldn’t need to sit in a waiting room! So, consider yourself lucky you don’t have to get the procedure and luckier you won’t be approached by the “Maury” show for a paternity test. And when it comes to gaining knowledge about birth control, it’s never too late to learn, but ‘forewarned is ‘forearmed!

  • invalid-0

    Is a male’s concern for abortion is nothing more than a male’s concern for contraception?

  • invalid-0

    I live in a country that was founded on THE BOTTOM LINE! I think reaching sexually-active males through the most-common-denominator (money), at least starts them thinking. I won’t speak for every male in America, since not every male here IS an American, for starters. I don’t have any “role models” of fathers who pay child-support to women who were merely sex-toys that got pregnant on them, so I can only imagine: it must be FUN going to court every time she thinks he’s hiding income she feels the kid(s) ought to have, it must be FUN to have to see her every time he picks up the kid for court-ordered visitation (especially if there’s new girlfriend/fiancee/wife waiting in the car), it must be FUN each time he has to watch what he says to the kid or where his hands are because any misstep could have him branded a sexual predator for life, it must be FUN haggling over which holidays the child can come over, it must be REAL FUN when she moves to another state (with a new boyfriend) but he’s still paying child support, it must be ABSOLUTE FUN when the child graduates/takes honors in school/gets married and he’s never informed in advance so he can share the moment, and it must be MORE FUN THAN BARREL OF MONKEYS when he does get informed the child is about to become a parent under conditions similar to his parenting start-up venture and she tells him “(S)he learned it from you.” Damn right, there should be an abortion clinic in every town, if not on every block, because we’re really having TOO MUCH FUN!

    Perhaps I can reach you with numbers you may not be seeing: you may see the amount of abortions per year, as opposed to the amount of live but unwanted births, as opposed to the total live births. Fine, but did it ever occur to you that (1) in a country this size, not that many females are getting pregnant in any one year; (2) it’s still a lot of females getting pregnant who rather wouldn’t; (3) that’s a lot more sexual encounters for each female to get to pregnancy, not mention all those occuring after fertilization leading up to eventual detection. All those years of abstinence-only “education” have done little to deter people from having sex (don’t think the only ones having it are those who get pregnant), but much to keep many unprepared for the consequences of sex without birth control, not just for people who don’t want to have children, but people who place themselves in physical/psychological danger BY having children. For many, abortion is a matter of survival.

    So, to answer your question, Anon, a male’s concern for abortion has little to do with a male’s concern for contraception: in most instances, had he not been brainwashed by ab-only education, there would have been contraception used in the first place – he’d be MAN enough to assure this. As the late Redd Fox used to say in his stand-up routine, “what do call a man who doesn’t believe in birth control? DADDY!….DAAADDY!” You know, there’s a Future Farmers of America, junior ROTC in high school, but I’ve never heard of Future Distant Daddys of America. Can’t be all that great, can it?

  • invalid-0

    Would the survival be extended to more women if women were also allowed post birth abortions?

  • invalid-0

    If the right to life post birth were extended over the womans body.

  • invalid-0

    Being unsure of your answer, this is a rewording of the prior question.

    Would legal post birth abortions provide more women more survival?

  • invalid-0

    ..Baby Grace, Caylee Anthony and many others: cute kids to look at but they should have never been born!

    • http://www.bloggingproductanalysis.com invalid-0

      you may be right, but should they have been aborted or should those parents have taken more responsibility…I guess that is the question…not really sure what the answer is though

  • invalid-0

    …MURDER? I see where this going. You can’t equate abortion with the killing of anyone who has already been logged into the government’s computers as a person. To my knowledge, not a single person was given a Social Security number while in utero. Want to spend some (tax) money to assure every pregnancy is given an SS# by having webcams reveal conception even before the woman knows it? And if the conceived one were lost from spontaneous abortion, do we execute the woman or give her Survivor Benefits? Oh, please, stimulate the economy by borrowing $10-trillion to establish that farce, because that’s what it will take to wire and monitor every uterus in America. Your “faith” is an obstacle to our Reality!

  • invalid-0

    …Death in childbirth, especially after doctor says dead fetus will her kill her if not expeditiously removed, enraged husband/boyfriend/buddy killing her once she shows. That’s just two, I’m sure there’s more! Someone help me out here: more complications when abortion is delayed?

  • invalid-0

    If the right to life post birth were violating the womans bodily integrity.

  • invalid-0

    It would be involuntary homicide if she does anything such as strenuous activity to her own body that hinders the embryos right to use her organs to maintain its life. Tampon testing as a crime investigation.

  • invalid-0

    …consuming caffeine and breast feeding, in addition to strenuous activity, can have the same result.

  • invalid-0

    Is caffeine good for nursing babies?

  • invalid-0

    I was referring to the effects of each (caffeine, breast feeding, and strenuous activity) on the embryo.

    What do you think? Is caffeine good for a nursing baby?

  • invalid-0

    Is a nursing baby good for caffeine?

  • http://kuyakevin.blogspot.com invalid-0

    A baby was born alive in Florida and thrown away in a botched abortion attempt.

    Forgive us, God.

  • invalid-0

    What does God need to forgive us of?

    p.s. web masters should take credit for altering entries.

  • invalid-0

    I can’t tell one Anon from the next – just how many people are posting is it just one person talking to him/herself? I haven’t flagged any entry because I technically can’t see it violating policy, but there are serious questions of accuracy and use of terminlogl, starting with the term “post birth abortion,” which in this person’s eyes does not equate to “partial birth abortion.”

  • invalid-0

    Yes, Christopher there are two Anonymous. I joined in with you due to issues with the same misuse of terms.

  • invalid-0

    This may be a new (haven’t seen it before) tactic on the trolls’ part to confuse those of us who use names, thinking each Anon’s post comes from the same person. I apologize in advance for any “friendly fire” you may have received.

  • brady-swenson

    Christopher, first, thank you for your time and willingness to engage in conversation here. I have reviewed the comment thread, and understand your frustration but also agree that no one specific comment yet violates our commenting policy.

    We may review our policy allowing anonymous commenting on the site at some point but for now will maintain it as there are many people, holding all points of view on these issues, who will only feel comfortable posting anonymously.

    Again, thanks for your time and well-written thoughts.

    Brady

  • invalid-0

    Who can be bothered be first amendment fire?

    Would legal post birth (i.e. toddler/newborn) abortions provide more women more survival?

    My mistake in thinking a prior post was altered by the web master.

  • invalid-0

    No problems Christopher, I too appreciate your comments. Just to add to your comment above about not being able to equate the bad terms to partial birth abortion…just the same in not being able to equate anything after birth with abortion given the womans bodily integrity isn’t being violated to maintain anothers life after birth.

  • invalid-0

    …Please do not redefine murder or infanticide as abortion, so someone can erroneously define actual abortion procedures as something that they are not (i.e. murder/infanticide). Who should be bothered by pretzel logic (i.e. Limbaugh/O’Reilly) wrapped in the First Amendment? Everyone!

  • invalid-0

    Why do you limit the abortion definition to pre birth?

    Would legal toddler/newborn homicide provide more women more survival?

  • invalid-0

    Similarly, why limit protections for the right to life when someone needs anothers body after birth? Would a newborn have better survival if it was protected when it needed the same resources in the womans body it had prior to birth? Why can someone go to jail for trying to maintain their life if they do so by violating anothers bodily integrity? Why is it infanticide to refuse to act on behalf of a newborn to feed or shelter it, but its not also infanticide to refuse to act to provide from ones bodily integrity?…especially if the resources in need were the same again that it had prior to birth? Why is it that putting a body part in a womans vagina after birth called sex and not partial re-birth?…and sometimes criminalized. So many distinctions made at birth.

  • invalid-0

    Abortion is shorthand for induced abortion of a pregnancy. Childbirth terminates the pregnancy.

  • http://www.goodcredit.com invalid-0

    I still say no to abortion. I never consider “accidental” children as their parents’ mistakes. They will always be a gift that should be treasured. Regardless of how many months the baby has spent in his/her mother’s womb, it IS a life worth protecting from harm. In the first place, if a couple never intended to have a child, they should have known better the consequences of their sexual intercourse. It does not take a great amount of intelligence to understand that a penile insertion into the vagina might result to a pregnancy. Hello, elementary biology?

    George

  • invalid-0

    I still say no to abortion. I never consider “accidental” children as their parents’ mistakes. They will always be a gift that should be treasured.

    Tell that to someone who can’t afford to “treasure” the child. That may be what YOU would do, and that is perfectly fine and more power to you. But it’s pretty freaking arrogant of you to say that that is what others SHOULD do in the same situation.

    In the first place, if a couple never intended to have a child, they should have known better the consequences of their sexual intercourse.

    Couples have sex for reasons other than having a baby, you know. Consent to sex is NOT consent to pregnancy, any more than consent to getting into a car is consent to becoming a paraplegic in an accident.

    It does not take a great amount of intelligence to understand that a penile insertion into the vagina might result to a pregnancy. Hello, elementary biology?

    Hello, birth control. You may have heard of it. It allows people to have sex without making a baby. Sometimes it fails. When it does, not everyone can nor should have the same attitude as you do regarding such an “accident.”

  • invalid-0

    So the pre born deserves to bears the risk of failed or no contraception?

  • invalid-0

    The pre-conceived are also pre-born too.

  • invalid-0

    Why should a newborn bear the risk of having been born? They didn’t choose to give up their mothers body.

  • invalid-0

    …people, who feel their lives have more meaning when they are surrounded by people forced to live meaningless, destitute lives. It pains me to think I once held such a Christian attitude, where one striving to live one’s own life by Scripture has to see others judged to live otherwise – especially when such judgements include a less-favorable living situation than one’s own, and feel better about one’s life. Yeah, it’s hard to point fingers and say “That female is whore because she didn’t marry before having sex,” when the female doesn’t have any children in tow, drives a nicer car than yours and lives in bigger house than yours. All you can say about the single, unattached, childless, “affluent” female is “how many abortions has SHE had?” Not quite the same punch that the other statement packs, because you don’t know the answer and it’s driving you crazy (OCD?).
    That’s what it’s all about: JEALOUSY. A feeling you’re losing to Jones, John and/or Jane because their lives might look a little better than yours because you did what was expected of you (go to church, marry, play reproductive roulette because your local society demands it, and suffer the mounting debt of too many kids because that’s what God wanted). Too bad for you the people you envy, many of them LGBT, many of them having had abortions, many of them never in committed relationships, don’t all live a more desperate life than your own, be it real or imaginary. I just saw a video banned by a TV station detailing the “threat” of homosexuality in our land, without acknowledging the self-hypocrisy, and it couldn’t keep the word “abortion” out of the dialogue. And you wonder why we think everyone who’s part of the Religious Right are all the same. Your neurosis (and I’m being kind here) would be comical 30 years ago, but there’s too much at stake to let it go. The constant attempts to change the language to suit your needs are indicative of a need less to win, but more not to lose! Believe there will be a judgement in the afterlife, for your envy-fueled support of the theocrat Bush is bringing US closer to the Apocalypse, and if there’s anything your God has a problem with, it’s forcing His hand!

  • invalid-0

    …more Americans adopted a gay life-style? But that would be cheating, wouldn’t it? It never occured to you so many marriages end in failure and violence, but never address root causes, such as out-dated family planning and one partner’s need (yes, need) to be a little less monogamous and/or a little more LGBT, than the other. Do you have such self-control, you don’t dare look at the just-divorced man and woman and say, “never should have been married to begin with,” because that would admit any marriage without strict government regulation is prone to failure in a world where one does not need to do much to be connected to the next town, or the other side of the world, for that matter. The world may still be flat, to you, but what challenges your beliefs is that it is also SMALL.

  • invalid-0

    When you leave Christianity, are you allowed to leave the “do not kill” part too?

  • invalid-0

    …must settle instead with children sexually abused by its priests. While Catholicism bears the brunt of institutionalized pedophilia, it is by no means the only offender in the “Christian” world: it was a lot easier to rape kids when abortion was illegal because there were so many of them getting sent off to die in our wars, but now that we have more children by choice, parents are more protective of their future investments. I wouldn’t send anyone’s child to die for less than nothing in Iraq and I certainly wouldn’t leave them in the company of a priest or minister. Hypocrites!

  • invalid-0

    …since people so slavishly wish to protect the unborn, I have already killed! Every time I was part of unprotected sex and pregnancy did not result, I killed the cells that could have fertilized because obviously it was something I was not doing, thereby falling under the “what I have failed to do” in praying for forgiveness for the multitudinous transgressions against God in-between Sundays (for me it’s even worse, since I have used latex to prevent, therefore, I’ve killed because of “what I have done”). And I was almost 20 before giving my virginity, so there’s been a lot of killing going on for years “Every sperm is sacred (Monty Python’s “the Meaning of Life”),” therefore the octuplet Mom should be canonised as a saint forthwith because she let SOOOO many more sperm live than the rest of us. I hope all you pro-choicers out there see the sarcasm here, but don’t be surprised at the sarchasm between this post and the theocratic response. I’m still waiting for the reponse to my “envy” challenge – must be true. The next time someone wants to remove a splinter from a pregnant woman’s eye, look in the mirror for the log in your own! Most of the people who heard Jesus were too poor to afford mirrors: no excuses today!

  • invalid-0

    And then the chapter in Numbers where a woman who is caught in an affair must be given a potion that induces the contents of her womb to drop out.

  • invalid-0

    Christopher, loved your comments above about changing the language too. Bravo!

  • invalid-0

    Is a prenatal no more human than a single sperm?

  • invalid-0

    …prenatal? In the eyes of at least one Church, YES! Doesn’t matter if he makes twice as much as me, finds the cure for cancer and even is “pro-life,” he’s an abomination and no act committed against him is sinful in the eyes of the insecure God whose insecure Church I left. Curious how we can “play God” through in-vitro fertilization but we are murderers when pregnancy is terminated – admittedly “with extreme prejudice!” Bring back Torquemada and the Inquisition, so my clone and all the people connected with the abortion industry and their clients can be tortured for ten years before being burned alive at the stake: that would be such a growth industry our economic troubles would evaporate!
    I wonder how much cash the IVF industry donates to to faith-based charities to maintain that double-standard?

  • invalid-0

    Why would homicide against your clone differ from homicide against your (if you had one) identical twin brother?

  • invalid-0

    Would the clone have the right to his body to maintain its life so that he would have a need to stop it?

  • invalid-0

    The prenatal? From wikipedia: Prenatal care refers to the medical care recommended for women before and during pregnancy. Do you mean single or multiple eggs? If its human eggs, or human sperm aren’t they all human? Even cancer in humans is human. Are two fertilized eggs that combine into a single egg post-conception more human than they were as individual fertilized eggs? Should they still be counted as two humans?…or did somebody die? Is an embryo that splits post conception into two separate embryos, are these separate embryos somehow each less human given they were only one conceptus, therefore the two are only one human in total?

  • invalid-0

    Is scratching his own skin, thereby killing the other cells, each one at the same stage of life as his first clone was, an act of homicide of his other clones?

  • invalid-0

    Christopher, if you have any need to stop an itch you might be committing homicide of your clone and other clones.

  • invalid-0

    If you could clone from a skin cell, would you not end up with a younger identical twin?

  • invalid-0

    Don’t scratch your skin Christopher, you’re committing homicide against your younger identical twins/clones. They have the right to their own living existing DNA at the earliest stage of their lives.

  • invalid-0

    Is a skin cell the same as a prenatal?

  • invalid-0

    Is a ‘prenatal’ single cell zygote any different than a single cell?

    If two embryos combine post-conception did someone die? If one embryo splits post-conception into two twins is it still one person?

  • invalid-0

    …will try to reply in shorter posts.

  • invalid-0

    …at birth only to face certain death. Are there protests, outside of hospitals that do this sort of thing? Somebody dies, because a birth certificate is assigned to each of the two, or is it? Even though they’re anesthetised, one sometimes dies? Does health insurance cover that?

  • invalid-0

    …conception and therefore has no soul. Remember, it’s all about the womb and vagina. You hardly hear a peep from anti-abortion advocates, about in-vitro fertilization, I suspect, because whatever was made in the lab still gets implanted and if it “takes” is labored out the vagina. That’s why I say the real “pro-life” agenda is to form a society where a woman has two purposes: beget, and raise the begotten.
    Cloning of humans would be prohibitively expensive, so to reduce cost, there would be no implantation and the product would be kept in some tank (probably in arrested development) until such time as needed. In a theocracy, homicide is acceptable, even praised, when that which is killed is either an infidel or an abomination: human cloning is both. It has to be, or the Church would have no leg to stand on with it’s “contraception (abortion especially) is ‘playing God’” argument.

  • invalid-0

    …a twin is born during the same final stage of pregnancy as only one other. As to the “identical” part, my clone might appear physically identical to me at whatever stage it is issued forth, but there’s no guarantee, for it would have not undergone the variables of fetal development that occured before I was born. The best one could say about a similarity to one’s clone is the clone is what the original had looked like had the original been produced in a similar environment – for example, just the prevalence of second-hand smoke in the 1950s might be enough to visibly alter my clone’s future appearance (if ever) from my own with the wealth of scientific knowledge gained in human (re)production in between the actual occurance (me) and the hypothetical occurence (clone). Plus, as posted elsewhere, there’s no guarantee human clones will be issued forth from their tanks at infant development – it may be more desirable for them to start breathing as fully-grown adults, thereby escaping all the (detrimental) experiences their originals had from vaginal birth. Too many variables happen during vaginal birth, so human cloning would need to be womb-free, if only to keep malpractice (or would it be consumer?) lawyers at bay. Cloning, as I see it, would need to be a proven bio-manufacturing process with strict quality controls to be a viable industry, because that’s the only way it has a future. The first generation clones (from the originals) will be somewhat “like a box of choc-lettes: you never know what you gonna get.” Clones of those clones might not have nearly the amount of variation I envision from the first batch.
    Conclusion: cloning would face even more resistance from theocrats because it would effectively end the future of religions who feel they should be the originator of all rules and that government is their facilitator (Iran). Abortion merely “thins the herd” but cloning would eliminate the entire flock, unless that religion can adapt to its entire flock eventually being composed of clones and foresake all references to the unborn.

  • invalid-0

    As the last comment at the time, I used the commenting feature below instead of the reply button so it didn’t embed as usual.
    My comment titled “Is a ‘prenatal’ single cell” with the question about single cell stage of ‘prenatal’ versus any other single cell… and additional questions about prenatal multiple cellular division is a reply to the other Anonymous comment “Is a skin cell the same as a prenatal?”

    Good points Christopher.

    • invalid-0

      …the possibilities on this date. And the question of sameness would definitely be different in the eye of the beholder, be s/he scientist, cleric, consumer. Yes, consumer, might be the government, for all we know. It might want clones because if they get killed, it would save the cost of having ceremonies, without a real Mom and Dad. The government who wanted clones for military service and other dangerous jobs (space) would skimp on physical development, and the messy part of parenting – more of a “shake and bake” approach. But it’s all conjecture, and we have plenty of time to have our society get used to the idea, maybe see a lot of anti-immigrant types object to cloning as the clones would not have had to go to school or church as the rest of US did, so there may be a push to send them to Mexico.

  • invalid-0

    Does the single skin cell have nine months‘ of “multiple cellular division” growth like a prenatal single cell can have?

  • invalid-0

    Can Christopher develop a fully grown clone any other way…he’s already mentioned a process.
    If two separate embryos combine post-conception and develop into one fully grown person did someone die? If one embryo splits post-conception into two twins is this still just one person?

  • invalid-0

    Would a clone take 9 months to gestate in that tank? or more or less?

    • invalid-0

      …not even have an umblical cord going to the abdomen (as in Fox TV’s “Space: Above and Beyond”). Why sumbmit the “product” to the perils of childhood if a clone could be tanked to “maturity” in less time?

  • invalid-0

    What variables of fetal development would the clone have not undergone?

  • invalid-0

    just the smoking example?

    • invalid-0

      …Currently, every chemical ingested by any female of any species would have some effect upon whatever occurs during gestation, not to mention whatever might already be stored in the tissues. DDT was banned in part because of its effects upon bird reproduction (bald eagles?). I have to wonder why so many “pro-life” people would focus so much on what’s growing in any woman’s body, when it’s the environment that determines our destination, especially the home environment. I’d be a lot more concerned about chemical plants polluting the air near schools than some teen terminating a pregnancy, thereby denying her fetus the “privilege” of childhood cancer that the health insurance won’t cover.

  • invalid-0

    Any reason to believe it would be different?

  • invalid-0

    Ever taken DNA testing to see if y’know you are really two people?

  • invalid-0

    If killing one identical twin prenatal is allowed, should we be allowed to kill one of the identical twins as infants?

    • invalid-0

      …conjoined twins, identical or not? And haven’t I already posted that? If we’re still on the clone plane, some will view them as human – with all rights and privileges, some will view them as abominations – as they never passed through a birth canal, some will view them as product – to be activated or discarded as the market determines. Cloning is still in its primitive stage and cloning laws are truly prehistoric.
      Meanwhile, the technology for separation of conjoined twins is better-than-ever but if there are too many organs shared by both, separation means death for one, so a choice must be made and IT IS.
      I think pro-lifers, to maintain consistency, should view the living twin as an abomination, because its conjoined sibling shouldn’t have to die so s/he could function better, especially if it were a boy that was chosen over the girl (“every sperm is sacred…”)

      • invalid-0

        Yes, you posted that already as has also already been posted cancer (also unique, living, human) and two unique embryos combining to form a single baby, one single fertilized embryo splitting into two…etc.

  • http://www.loncn.cn invalid-0

    Stem cell for Parkinson ,batten, Cerebral Palsy, stroke, spinal cord injury and range of brain injuries
    Like Cell (Wu Stem Cells Medical Center) is committed to stem cell research and provides the world’s most advanced stem cell procedures and treatments in Asia’s top neuroliogical therapy center, bringing new hope and a better quality of life to people who suffered from Parkinson’s disease,batten disease,Cerebral Palsy, stroke, spinal cord injury and range of brain injuries.
    We email: likecell@likecell.cn
    http://www.likecell.cn/index.php3?file=detail.php3&kdir=3486221&nowdir=3434747&id=1146847&detail=1
    Tel:00861083616677-825 Molley
    00861083616677-831 Grischa
    00861083616677-821 Susan
    Fax:00861083614989
    Such as Penny
    NAME: Penny Thomas

    COUNTRY: U.S.A. (Hawaii)

    AGE: 52

    REASON FOR COMING FOR TREATMENT: Penny had Parkinson’s symptoms for eight years.

    DIAGNOSIS: Parkinson’s Syndrome (Diagnosed in 2002)
    BEFORE THE TREATMENT (May 11, 2006): Penny had uncontrollable shaking. Her muscles were extremely tense. She had high muscle tension and she looked like she was extremely strong but in fact her muscles were weak. When she was walking or doing anything, she would have freeze ups where she would stop and not be able to continue her motion. If she were talking on the telephone, it would be hard to talk on the telephone. She could not read or write because of the tremors. She could not eat by herself. She could not get up out of a chair by herself. She could not brush her hair. She could not get out of the bed by herself. She had trouble turning her neck.
    TREATMENT: Dr Like Wu and Dr Xiaodi Han gave her injection into the brain of retinal neural stem cells with a daily cocktail treatment of neurotropic factors.

  • invalid-0

    At what point do we justify one’s homicide to benefit another’s living standard improvement?

  • invalid-0

    At what point do we justify one’s homicide to benefit another’s living standard improvement?

  • invalid-0

    …improvement?”We were living in fear of another 9/11 and Dick Cheney told US Saddam Hussein was responsible for 9/11. So, to improve our peace of mind, as it was sold to US, we invaded Iraq, and while I’m sure some Iraqi feti never reached birth as a result, hundreds of thousands of bona fide Iraqi citizens perished from our actions. Yes, Saddam didn’t allow the inspectors, but no, there were no weaopns, and Cheney lied, so you tell me: was all that homicide committed by US justified?
    Short answer abortion is not homicide. Think what you want.

  • invalid-0

    The prenatal a not a unique living human?

  • http://www.twintierfinancial.com/the_uncommon_cents/2009/04/online-term-insurance.html invalid-0

    I’m sticking with the idea that it’s the woman’s right to choose what to do with her body. Yes, there are men who end up in the hospital with their ladies pushing them to something they don’t want…yes, they should probably be more educated on contraceptives.

    However, at the end of the day, I think that if you take the choice away from the woman – it is her body after all – you are playing a game of push and pull and trying to decide who has rights and who doesn’t. I see some people making this an issue of pro-life vs. pro abortion and it’s really about whether someone has a *choice* about what to do with their bodies or not.