Una historia preciosa para este domingo:
We’re twinseparable! Happy with his brother, the boy who refused to die | the Daily Mail…

They got the best possible outcome, didn’t they? Thank God.

When our son was born 43 yrs ago this month, he was called a mongoloid idiot and a cleric told me we must have done something wrong…this was God’s punishment.

The most help came from other parents – doctors and clergy didn’t handle stuff well then and probably are not much better now. His sheltered workshop has already sent Thanksgiving cards to Iraq! Will you do the same?

Thank you for being civil as well. Liberals would probably have a conniption at our kind of dialogue.

I understand your position and I respect it. I do believe that the procedure now opens new opportunities that should be explored.

I don’t, however, believe it was incompetence. That could have well been the case, but since I have no idea about this doctor’s experience and credentials, I can’t say. I’m more inclined to believe that this situation is a rare one that either had no precedent or had a precedent that gave the desired result (one child alive). I think that they didn’t regularly deal with this kind of thing and went with the best knowledge they had. But I think this is an occasion for science to explore more ways to preserve life and I believe God had a hand in it.

Still, like I said before, I am willing for God to change my mind about this or clarify it later on in life. I am glad that a subject as touchy as this could be done in a civil, yet rigorous, manner. See ya around.

Why didn’t the doctors explore other alternatives? As zb42 says above, it sounds like incompetence on the part of the physician – and perhaps the PHYSICIAN’S laziness that preyed on the (justifiably worried and protective) mother.

While no professional, it sounds as if perhaps the splitting of the placenta should be researched as an alternative to direct abortion.

I still don’t buy the argument that sacrificing one child to save another is the line drawn in the sand on this issue. That’s like shoving one of your children into a fire because you think you only have time to get one out of the house.

I understand your position, but I still argue that women and children deserve better than this procedure.

With regards to the other issues I raised, I wasn’t speaking at you directly but at people who think abortion is this wonderful thing that’s as painless and with as little consequence as going to the hairdresser. They often don’t care, or ignore, the issues that stem directly from abortion, and I’ve run across several pro-choice folks who are more than quick to deny or mock the suffering of women who’ve had abortions and come to regret them.

Thanks for being civil in this debate.

Firstly they tried to sever his umbilical cord to cut off his blood supply, but the cord was too strong.

They then cut Mrs Jones’s placenta in half so that when Gabriel died, it would not affect his twin brother.

While I’m not a medical person (AND I’m pro-life), this sounds like gross incompetence on the part on the physicians.

Proponents of socialized medicine should be required to receive medical treatment in countries with such systems in place.

THEN, we’d see how much they really want to bring it to our shores.

There’s no need for the harshness, dakine. I fully respect Gabe’s position. I just felt that he incorrectly assumed the mother wanted to kill her child as opposed to trying to save another. Judging people based on difficult decisions well after the results with only an article as reference to what was going on during the pregnancy is, to me, far too easy and far too unwise.

Like I said, I’m willing for God to change my mind if need be. Until then, this is my view on this matter.

Well thought out, but wrong.

First, the Bible verse you used from Jeremiah is about Jeremiah himself being appointed as a prophet. Now, I’m not saying it doesn’t apply to everyone, but using verses out of context is quite dangerous.

As pointed out above, pre-natal care is not an exact science. There are COUNTLESS stories about women who receive abnormal test results, ultrasounds, etc., but have perfectly healthy babies, or – like my friend – doctors who predict wrong due dates and baby weight, so the baby is born 5 weeks earlier than expected.

This mother had an obligation to get a second or third opinion and then explore alternatives to abortion. There are many cases of twins being of differing size for reasons that usually aren’t fatal. To jump from sick baby to abortion is a misguided step at best.

You said “sick baby”. The reason they tried to terminate wasn’t because the baby was sick. It was because trying to bring both to term would endanger the life of the other. Basically, killing two babies because of the defect of one.

I know that prenatal care isn’t an exact science, but you’re also presuming the doctor wasn’t accurate in his assessment. What if, in 90% of the cases, the result would be what the doctor said, regardless of how many opinions were sought out? Who’s to say the mother did not try and seek other opinions? Another assumption without warrant. Even if she didn’t, are we also to assume the doctor was incompetent? No, I would rather believe that he thought the outcome would be like other documented cases and went with precedent. Not always right, but understandable.

Period. The “flexibility” of this definition (when does life begin, etc.) has opened wide the door for other horrors. Don’t believe me? Look up Peter Singer and see what wisdom he imparts (here’s a hint: he thinks babies up to the age of one are NOT HUMAN, and therefore killing them should not be a crime). Nice, huh?

And did you know that abortion has led to the murder of children who are “imperfect”? Children with harelips or cleft palates (deformities that are easily treatable after birth) are being aborted, as are children with Down Syndrome.

This is classic straw-man. At no time did I ever imply that killing imperfect babies was acceptable, so why bring it up? The analogies are not the same. I was alluding to the fact that one baby’s defect was the cause of a life-dangering situation for the other. This is crucial to the point. This was never about a convenience. It was a choice between one dead or both dead.

The Catholic Church teaches that life begins at conception. There is no fuzzy thinking on this – it’s an explicit teaching. To end a life is murder. That seems pretty good evidence for me.

I’m not Catholic and, while I agree with the statement, it seems pretty obvious this situation was about preserving a life. Let me state again: the situation is one baby does or both die. I don’t think this is not as clear-cut as one thinks.

A brief bit of research into Margaret Sanger – the foundress of Planned Parenthood Planned Barrenhood – shows she desired to “cull the herd” of undesirables – the unintelligent, the deformed, and racial minorities.

Thanks to the supporters of “choice”, that’s exactly what’s happening.

Those very same supporters of abortion who are so big on “women’s health” when it comes to abortion sure turn away from those very same women post-abortion when women have mental, emotional, and physical scars that last a lifetime. And the counselors at Planned Parenthood Planned Barrenhood aren’t exactly there to lend a helping hand, you know.

Screw Margaret Sanger. She was creepy eugenics beast that had no problem with trying to sterilize “undesirables”. But how does this relate to this situation? It doesn’t.

Abuse language if you will by calling abortion a “choice”, but abortion is never the right answer.

I’ve always seen abortion as, mostly, peoples’ way of not growing up and accepting the consequences of their actions. They want to mess around, but not incur any cost. I hate the term “choice”. But here, we do not have that issue. Yet again, this was about saving one life or condemning both to die. I am glad it turned out favorably, but hindsight is 20/20. Who’s to say there was not an equally good chance it would have gone the other way had to decided not to abort?

I am not saying her actions were right. I am saying that she was not wrong. Some are jumping to the conclusion, after the fact, saying, “She was wrong, wrong, wrong!”. I think this is not very wise. Maybe God will change my mind later on and I welcome it. But for now, I think this is a matter than is more complex than people think.

Have you ever heard Jeremiah 1:4: “Now the word of the Lord came to me saying, ‘Before I knit you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you.’ “?

Man is made in God’s image, and the decisions of life and death should not be made my man. There are also countless passages about “being fruitful” and the importance of the dignity of the human being. I think you need to re-study your Bible if you think it doesn’t make a pretty damn strong pro-life case.

As pointed out above, pre-natal care is not an exact science. There are COUNTLESS stories about women who receive abnormal test results, ultrasounds, etc., but have perfectly healthy babies, or – like my friend – doctors who predict wrong due dates and baby weight, so the baby is born 5 weeks earlier than expected.

This mother had an obligation to get a second or third opinion and then explore alternatives to abortion. There are many cases of twins being of differing size for reasons that usually aren’t fatal. To jump from sick baby to abortion is a misguided step at best.

The Catholic Church teaches that life begins at conception. There is no fuzzy thinking on this – it’s an explicit teaching. To end a life is murder. That seems pretty good evidence for me.

Period. The “flexibility” of this definition (when does life begin, etc.) has opened wide the door for other horrors. Don’t believe me? Look up Peter Singer and see what wisdom he imparts (here’s a hint: he thinks babies up to the age of one are NOT HUMAN, and therefore killing them should not be a crime). Nice, huh?

And did you know that abortion has led to the murder of children who are “imperfect”? Children with harelips or cleft palates (deformities that are easily treatable after birth) are being aborted, as are children with Down Syndrome.

A brief bit of research into Margaret Sanger – the foundress of Planned Parenthood Planned Barrenhood – shows she desired to “cull the herd” of undesirables – the unintelligent, the deformed, and racial minorities.

Thanks to the supporters of “choice”, that’s exactly what’s happening.

Those very same supporters of abortion who are so big on “women’s health” when it comes to abortion sure turn away from those very same women post-abortion when women have mental, emotional, and physical scars that last a lifetime. And the counselors at Planned Parenthood Planned Barrenhood aren’t exactly there to lend a helping hand, you know.

Abuse language if you will by calling abortion a “choice”, but abortion is never the right answer.

I am very grateful that this little boy survived. And I hope his life is a testament to the importance of respecting the dignity of every single human being from conception to natural death.

Hate to bring movies up as an example, but have you ever seen U-571, or Master and Commander? Both have a situation where the commander must sacrifice a crew member to save the ship, which I believe provides an analogy to this situation.

Incidently, the first thing I thought when I read this was “oh, but its not a baby till its born!” (Sarcasm, obviously) The tissue blob was fighting for its life! I am still waiting for the pro-abortion folks to explain exactly when the fetus becomes a human being and what exactly changes between the two…