Since: Feb 08

Philadelphia, PA

#225675 Sep 15, 2012
LAWEST100 wrote:
<quoted text> I'M laughing at the nasty fool that you are, Lol.
No you are not. Such a liar. Tsk tsk.
Ocean56

AOL

#225676 Sep 16, 2012
CherryTheTart wrote:
Hi Friend. Good to see you. Expect an email from me shortly.
Thanks, Cherry; I'll look forward to it. I hope all is well with you and your family.
good wife

San Antonio, TX

#225677 Sep 16, 2012
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
At 28 weeks. How does this refute what I said?
I was speaking of the artificial surfectant he received - you were obviously unaware that there was such a thing - just a little info coming your way - never said anything about refuting anything you said.
good wife

San Antonio, TX

#225678 Sep 16, 2012
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, and just by the way, 30 weeks IS still a problem. Which is why they do everything in their power to make sure the pregnancy last longer than that, at least 36/37 weeks. You are incorrect there.
Didn't you just get after me with some 28 week comment and now you're saying 30 weeks is still a problem - make up your mind.
good wife

San Antonio, TX

#225679 Sep 16, 2012
mamma-san wrote:
<quoted text>
So? what do you want? A cookie? NO ONE is saying anything about killing preemies. No one is denying that SOME infants born at 24 weeks or thereabouts survive.
What we ARE saying is that no woman should be forced to remain pregnant and give birth against her will. Period.
I will fight to the death for any woman's right to retain a pregnancy she wants. All of us will. We will also fight to the death for her right to give that child up for adoption if she so wants.
It is YOU who want to limit her choices. It is YOU who wants to make her nothing more than a brood mare. It is YOU who thinks that a cluster of cells smaller than the head of a pin is more important than a living, breathing, sentient woman.
Shame on you.
You really piss me off! You make it difficult for me to behave as a God believing person - I did not say one damn word about abortion you ignorant ass - I was replying to something bitner said about the chemical the body produces to keep the lungs from sticking together enabling a baby to breath - this chemical is usually not produced by preemies and medical science has come up with an articial means to help them - that's it - I said nothing about abortion rights and you have no idea what I think - you accuse me of shit that you make up so you can keep your argument alive - you are such a foul bitch - go soak your head, preferably in a loaded toilet. You are downright boorish and tiresome. I never accused anyone of killing preemies -

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#225680 Sep 16, 2012
good wife wrote:
<quoted text>I was speaking of the artificial surfectant he received - you were obviously unaware that there was such a thing - just a little info coming your way - never said anything about refuting anything you said.
Oh no, I was aware. What I'm unaware of is any statistics that say it's been given successfully to a preemie under 22 weeks, which was what I was talking about.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#225681 Sep 16, 2012
good wife wrote:
<quoted text>Didn't you just get after me with some 28 week comment and now you're saying 30 weeks is still a problem - make up your mind.
The one has nothing to do with the other. My response to the other poster was to his contention that preemies at 30 weeks no longer present a problem. They are wrong. My response to you was about the fact that you were giving me an anecdotal story about a 28 week preemie, when I was discussing 22 weeks and before.
good wife

San Antonio, TX

#225682 Sep 16, 2012
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh no, I was aware. What I'm unaware of is any statistics that say it's been given successfully to a preemie under 22 weeks, which was what I was talking about.
Really? Please point out the post in which you said you knew about it and that there was no proof that in could be used successfully in anything younger than 22 weeks.
good wife

San Antonio, TX

#225683 Sep 16, 2012
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
No one is suggesting killing preemies, Drama Queen.
The fact is that medical intervention has reached it's limit. There is no way to keep a preemie alive before 22 weeks (and yes, 21 weeks and 5 days IS 22 weeks for all intents and purposes), because fetal lungs do not begin to produce surfacant until 21 weeks. Without surfacant, respriation is not possible. Another fact is that the more intervention needed, the higher the risk of serious medical problems will result. This exception you like to keep trotting out is just that, and exception. And an extreme one at that. Yet another fact for you, though you don't seem overly concerned with pertinent facts, is that 98.7% of all abortions occur at 21 weeks and BEFORE.
Here is what you said - no mention about knowing about the artificial surfectant and no mention about it's success rate in young preemies.
good wife

San Antonio, TX

#225684 Sep 16, 2012
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
The one has nothing to do with the other. My response to the other poster was to his contention that preemies at 30 weeks no longer present a problem. They are wrong. My response to you was about the fact that you were giving me an anecdotal story about a 28 week preemie, when I was discussing 22 weeks and before.
Actually I was not as concerned about the age as I was about the FACT that there is help and you have no idea at what stage it will aid a preemie.

“Becoming a better me!”

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#225685 Sep 16, 2012
good wife wrote:
<quoted text>You really piss me off! You make it difficult for me to behave as a God believing person - I did not say one damn word about abortion you ignorant ass - I was replying to something bitner said about the chemical the body produces to keep the lungs from sticking together enabling a baby to breath - this chemical is usually not produced by preemies and medical science has come up with an articial means to help them - that's it - I said nothing about abortion rights and you have no idea what I think - you accuse me of shit that you make up so you can keep your argument alive - you are such a foul bitch - go soak your head, preferably in a loaded toilet. You are downright boorish and tiresome. I never accused anyone of killing preemies -
Please accept my profound apologies. I confused you with Grunt56.

“IMAGINE no religion!”

Since: Feb 09

usa

#225686 Sep 17, 2012
good wife wrote:
<quoted text>Didn't you just get after me with some 28 week comment and now you're saying 30 weeks is still a problem - make up your mind.
\

anti choice people [not saying you] want to tout the very rare instances when a 22/5 baby is born and survives.

most don't. in fact i believe it is between 1-2% do survive. and only with extreme medical interventions. and most of the babies are born into low income families. which means that the public is supporting them. not that i have a problem with it, just putting it out there for the grunting imbecile.

also babies born at 30 weeks still require alot of medical intervention. and its painful for alot of these babies. the fact that babies born at 28-30 weeks usually survive, but have some lasting medical/mental problems is a fact.

i have even seen babies born at 32 weeks that have severe disabilities.

fact of the matter is.....the womb is the number one ideal environment to incubate a fetus. not an isolette in a NICU.

I am glad your son survived!

“No Allah: know peace”

Since: Jun 07

A sacred grove in Tujunga, CA

#225687 Sep 17, 2012
love_spell wrote:
anti choice people [not saying you] want to tout the very rare instances when a 22/5 baby is born and survives.
most don't. in fact i believe it is between 1-2% do survive. and only with extreme medical interventions. and most of the babies are born into low income families. which means that the public is supporting them. not that i have a problem with it, just putting it out there for the grunting imbecile.
...
The saddest part of that is that the same people supporting womb slavery for women are also the ones loudest against ANY sort of public aid...

“This wont hurt, much”

Since: May 12

Palo Alto, CA.

#225688 Sep 17, 2012
mamma-san wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Birth control fails, even using a condom and the pill. Some women who use three forms of birth control still find themselves pregnant.
2. Unfortunately, men don't come with a sign that says "I'll stay around and be a father to any child we create." Men LIE. Repeatedly. Unashamedly. Men who are around for years have been known to disappear despite having children.
Until you find a cure for birth control that fails and men who suddenly choose NOT to be responsible, STFU.
Both of your arguments are good supporting arguments for my own C.
and then your closing argument is another point I made with D.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#225689 Sep 19, 2012
good wife wrote:
<quoted text>Really? Please point out the post in which you said you knew about it and that there was no proof that in could be used successfully in anything younger than 22 weeks.
I never said I'd already posted that. Learn to read. I'm talking about a 22 week preemie. That's what I been talking about.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#225690 Sep 19, 2012
good wife wrote:
<quoted text>Here is what you said - no mention about knowing about the artificial surfectant and no mention about it's success rate in young preemies.
Yes, I know what I said. You are the one having a problem understanding it, apparently.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#225691 Sep 19, 2012
good wife wrote:
<quoted text>Actually I was not as concerned about the age as I was about the FACT that there is help and you have no idea at what stage it will aid a preemie.
I know that if it was actually helping any neonate born before 22 weeks, then there wouldn't be just two examples of those born then over the last 30 years, that had survived.

“Saw 'em April 15th 1977”

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#225693 Sep 22, 2012
good wife wrote:
<quoted text>You really piss me off!
It seems facts do that to you. Facts are against you, as is the law. Make up whatever you like, abortion is safe, legal and none of your business unless it's yours.
lifes a beach

Myerstown, PA

#225694 Sep 22, 2012
Grunt56 wrote:
<quoted text>
That would be a great argument if it weren't completely false. Babies have been born prior to 23 weeks and survived.
Point being most women have early term abortions which are long before that.
lifes a beach

Myerstown, PA

#225695 Sep 22, 2012
Grunt56 wrote:
<quoted text>
You keep going back to that. First, it fits. It stands as an example of my point. Second, I never said I could prevent abortion. I also can't prevent murder, rape, or littering. That doesn't make any of them right or moral.
Murder and rape are criminal; abortion is not. Not even comparable. Apples to oranges.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
bhains ki chudai liaise ki........ (Feb '14) 5 min Crazy Jaat 30
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 6 min marge 548,466
what are the physical differences between india... (Jun '09) 13 min fiz 36
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 31 min nanoanomaly 750,282
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 35 min RADEKT 261,623
Blaming Israel for carnage (Jul '06) 59 min Molly the jewess 118,650
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 1 hr Senecus 602,159
Have any girls on here had sex with a dog??? (Feb '12) 10 hr girls united states 125

Top Stories People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE