I'm sure I could come up with stats that will belie yours.

You aren't keeping up. Scroll back to my post that's two before this one. It's not far away. It starts out with "What would you suggest?" Or to make it easier for you to find, I could repost it. (How does it feel to be talked down to?)

"a third result for an abortion"??? That's not the topic in dispute!

I'd love to see them.

I read your quote from the doc. You do realize that anecdotal evidence is not considered nearly so valuable as statistics. It could certainly be argued that Gunter had a vested interest in justifying what he/she had been doing for five years.

Have you ever read a description of a D & X abortion? Just so you will know what your beloved doctor has been doing, here it is. "The abortion practitioner instrumentally reaches into the uterus, grasps the fetus' feet, and pulls the feet down into the cervix. The reason this is done is not as a medical necessity, but to avoid actually birthing the baby. If the baby were fully born, killing it would be considered murder. The fetus is then pulled down the birth canal until it has been entirely birthed except the head. Surgical scissors are forced into the base of the fetal skull while the fetus is lodged in the birth canal. This blind procedure risks maternal injury from laceration of the uterus or cervix by the scissors and could result in severe bleeding and the threat of shock or even maternal death. A suction apparatus is introduced into the hole in the base of the skull and the fetus' brains are removed through aspiration. The baby is then born dead."

I guess that is fine with you. It is not with me.

As to the third option not being the topic in dispute, this is from your post a little earlier. It sure seemed that Doctor Gunter was going to settle that issue. You can phrase it any way you want, but the only way to have an abortion is to kill the baby. You think that is excusable. Well, in some extremely rare cases it is, but for the other 99% I can't see it.

Again, please read Dr. Gunter's comments about this.

As the good doctor explained (you musta skipped over that part),"In these situations (tripoidy, mirror syndrome etc.) the fetus can be lying lengthwise (not head or buttocks down) so labor is not an option," thus the dismemberment that you abhor. It isn't done "just because" and "for gits and shiggles."

From webmd:

Late-Term Abortion: Dilation and Extraction

If you’re having an abortion further along in your pregnancy, you may have to find a specialized, experienced provider to do a dilation and extraction procedure, or D&X. This is a procedure that doctors usually reserve for when there is a serious problem with the fetus or medical complications related to the mother.

So it is your position that it is much better to kill and dismember the baby than to perform a C-section?? Wow.

At any rate, according to your doc, that is not what happens. The article goes on to say, "In these situations (tripoidy, mirror syndrome etc.) the fetus can be lying lengthwise (not head or buttocks down) so labor is not an option. A c-section is needed for delivery. Maybe there are also health reasons a c-section is less than ideal. Maybe the pregnant person just doesn’t want a c-section for a non-viable pregnancy. If a person who is skilled to do a D & X is available (my emphasis), the c-section can be avoided.

When we have reached the place of suctioning out a baby's brain, then I'm not sure what else can be said.

I really cannot figure out what you are advocating for. You said abortion for all reasons in the third trimester, which amounts to unlimited abortion. It is hard for me to fathom how anyone who has any knowledge at all of God could have such a position. Is that what you are after?

No, again you don't read. I suspect you "spot-read" what appeals to you for future arguing, twist the information you are given, and skip over the rest that doesn't fit on your agenda.

I guess I'll have to bow to all your experience with and knowledge of abortions. Or you and I will have to meet for pie and coffee someday.

Uhm... you wrote it.

I would fear for my life! (<:

remember (and it wasn't that long ago) when the Dems said that they wanted abortion safe ,legal ,and rare ? Now I guess they mean that applies when a baby is born alive after a botched abortion or when the baby is ready to be born. il duce Cuomo signed a NY abortion bill that legalizes it through the entire pregnancy ...and the Dems in NY went into joyous celebration.

...especially those children at the Texas-Mexico border -- and the U.S. babies whose parents can't afford them.

of course you have no evidence that is happening . Are you supporting the killing of babies ?

Babies have died at the border, and they die every day in this country because of adults' neglect and inability to care for them. And NO, I don't support the killing of babies.

you are equating deaths due to disease at the border with the legal infanticide the US participates in ? 54 million babies lives intentionally snuffed in the US since 1973 . Rare ?

How many babies and children died because medical care was refused, because of awful living conditions? Why were US babies' lives "snuffed"? -- "we changed our minds"?

do you have the stats ? I don't . I can't imagine that it is close to 45 million We are in Mao and Stalin mass murder territory .

In 2015, 638,169 legal induced abortions were reported to CDC from 49 reporting areas. The abortion rate for 2015 was 11.8 abortions per 1,000 women aged 15–44 years, and the abortion ratio was 188 abortions per 1,000 live births.
Compared with 2014, the total number, rate, and ratio of reported abortions for 2015 decreased 2%. Additionally, from 2006 to 2015, the number, rate, and ratio of reported abortions decreased 24%, 26%, and 19%, respectively. In 2015, all three measures reached their lowest level for the entire period of analysis (2006—2015).
Women in their twenties accounted for the majority of abortions in 2015 and throughout the period of analysis. The majority of abortions in 2015 took place early in gestation: 91.1% of abortions were performed at ≤13 weeks’ gestation; a smaller number of abortions (7.6%) were performed at 14–20 weeks’ gestation, and even fewer (1.3%) were performed at ≥21 weeks’ gestation. In 2015, 24.6% of all abortions were early medical abortions (a non-surgical abortion at ≤8 weeks’ gestation). The percentage of abortions reported as early medical abortions increased 114% from 2006 to 2015, with an 8% increase from 2014 to 2015. Source: Abortion Surveillance — United States, 2015. MMWR Surveill Summ 2018;67(No. SS-13)

https://www.cdc.gov/reproductiveheal...s/abortion.htm

***************
ANNUAL ABORTION STATISTICS

• Based on the latest state-level data available, approximately 882,000 abortions took place in the United States in 2017—down from approximately 885,000 abortions in 2016 and 913,000 abortions in 2015.

https://www.abort73.com/abortion_fac...on_statistics/

While you are correct Tom you will never get the women's rights movement to admit they are mass murderers

True. Sadly, the dems and feminists have never been willing to place the life of a baby above their own political agenda. When Bill Clinton said abortions should be rare, that was just a talking point. From what I have seen, they basically don't care. Even women claiming to be Christians will not oppose this terrible practice.

What's really unfortunate is repub Christian conservatives trying to control and keep women and minorities in there place by any means necessary. Save your rhetoric for your parishioners, in your little communities and enjoy your lives and stay out of everyone else's. Obviously women think they know what's best for them and no longer want your old right wing advice on the subject.

I concur because abortions are becoming unnecessary, and late term abortions are rare.

So that means the NY governor has to boost the numbers, once again you are defending the indefensible, one to too many Tal

I wasn't asking abortion stats . I was asking a quantification of the proposal that a significant number of babies and children died because medical care was refused, because of awful living conditions? Those numbers cant be quantified . I can say affirmatively that since Roe ;45 million babies were killed in the US by abortion(and that is a conservative estimate ;I've seen numbers as high as 60 million plus .)

Beating people over the head won't change that Clete, never has. Baby steps in the right direction though may get us both where we want to be.