Re: Any anti-abortion atheists?

On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 15:38:07 GMT, Bob Moss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>
>
>Erica wrote:
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>>  [EMAIL PROTECTED] (robpar) wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>>On 1 Dec 2003 15:10:08 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Erica) wrote:
>>>
>> 
>> 
>>>>The fact that I did so through excessive sarcasm is my bad. I just got
>>>>slightly steamed, is all. But robparr's tone didn't warrent it, so I'm
>>>>sorry.
>>>>
>>>
>>>  I tend to be very sarcastic when flaming a so called Pro-Lifer.  Which you
>>>appeared to be with the religious bigots. In using their lies about a near 
>>>full
>>>term abortion. Which is only used when there is no hope of saving the baby, 
>>>and
>>>the mothers life is at stake.
>> 
>> 
>> I'm personally pro-life for my own choice, but pro-choice otherwise, if 
>> that makes sense. I am also woefully underinformed on the subject and 
>> reacting on pure emotion (not that this ever stopped anyone on usenet 
>> from jumping right into a discussion, mind you). No lies, just reacting 
>> very subjectively on less than adequate data. 
>>  
>> Thank you for your first hand information. You are indeed operating from 
>> a position that is better informed than mine. I will therefore bow out 
>> of the discussion and toddle over to google to do a bit of research.
>> 
>I understand your take about being pro-life for yourself, and pro-choice 
>otherwise.  I think one of the best weapons the 'pro-life' people have 
>is ignorance about the subject in the general population. In Robpars
>case, the 4th pregnancy would have forced a c-section.  I don't think
>that forcing a woman to recover from a c-section in that case is
>medically or morally proper.

  According to the Doctor and other medical people that I know. The removal
through the vagina is safer and easier on the mother. So we followed medical
advice.