Posts Tagged ‘Pro-Religion’

Pro-Choice and Pro-Life Terms Toxic

March 9, 2009

In regards to the debate about the ethical use of discarded frozen embryos for stem cell research:

I find it obscene that many do not respect freedom of religion as guaranteed by the First Amendment. If one doesn’t support the First Amendment, perhaps they should move to a country that is controlled by religious zealots.

That is why I consider both the pro-life and pro-choice terms to be toxic and unconstitutional if used in the wording of law.

Many do not believe that a frozen embryo is “life”. It is religious faith that says life starts at conception. We don’t live in a country where religious dogma is allowed to be shoved down one’s throat.

I think all would agree that life occurs when a fetus is viable outside the womb which certainly happens at about 22 – 25 weeks gestation with intensive medical care. In the first eight weeks before the body is physically though not functionally partially formed, this is a matter of religious faith. It should not be a matter of law unless you want to revoke the First Amendment right to freedom of religion.
I do not believe life begins at conception. Although retired, I have practiced neonatology and my patients are in the Guinness Book of World Records 1997 ed (the Vincent triplets) as “the lightest set of triplets in the world” – combined weight 4lb 4oz, born in 1990. They are now healthy productive adults. Therefore, I believe I have a better understanding of biology concerning development than most people. I respect freedom of religion or faith. This means that I respect those that believe life begins at conception, but also expect them to respect those, like me, who believes that it does not. I don’t believe there is a human being with a soul until there is a thinking functioning brain.

The development of the brain is a continuum NOT a finite issue-starting with the most primitive “brain” or spinal cord reflexes and continuing development of complex thought through a person’s young adult years. Electroencephalography suggests the capacity for functional pain perception in premature infants probably does not exist before 29 or 30 weeks gestational age (31 to 32 wks after woman’s last period); this study asserted that withdrawal reflexes and changes in heart rates and hormone levels in response to invasive procedures are reflexes that do not indicate fetal pain or development of human thought part of brain. Lee, S. J. (2005). “Fetal Pain: A Systematic Multidisciplinary Review of the Evidence”.JAMA: the Journal of the American Medical Association 294 (8): 947–54.doi:10.1001/jama.294.8.947. PMID 16118385.
The following gestational ages mentioned are just estimates as some development can be speeded up or slowed down depending on exposure to steroids or due to variable gene expression. Development is a continuum, not a discrete process where you can say for sure that in every case the stage was reached at the same time – so you may have a good looking heart that is not fully septated without a properly functioning conduction system at 18 wks gestational age (20 wks after woman’s last period) for example. The heart is not septated and functioning as a mature heart with a mature conduction system other than a beating tube until around 20 wks gestational age. The lungs are not fully canalized until 26 wks – this varies according to how stress hormones of mother as lung development is speeded up with steroids (tubes start out as solid, then form a lumen, then the air sacs develop). The brain does not show reaction to pain until close to 29-30 wks and the movement, sucking, reflexes that are seen are primitive – some from the spine and some from lower brain levels.

Thought processes in a primitive way, not yet mature evolve in a continuum and take the longest with the higher thinking brain even developing continually until past the teen years (that’s why children age five don’t understand time and teens have poor processing of consequences and control of impulses).
Therefore, there is a gray area between about 18 weeks and 25-26 wks gestational age or 20 to 28 wks after woman’s period ) where there is a very big question as to when a thinking, feeling brain actually is achieved. I have no problem or concern about abortions before about 20 wks gestational age or at any time if severe defects incompatible with life such as anencephaly (no brain above spinal cord or behind face) or extreme spina bifida with empty skull and brain sticking out of back of neck.

This is because the longer you delay delivery in a case of lethal anomalies the more suffering in the dying process you will cause. In lethal anomaly cases I view the woman’s womb as a ventilator similar to a case of brain death.

I think therefore, that there should not be legislation dictating faith as science cannot answer the question of when life begins concerning the 18-25 wk period gestational age. I would for sure allow abortion before 20 wks.

As brain development is a continuum, why should a woman not be allowed to abort a fetus with congenital defects that are NOT compatible with life at any point in the pregnancy when the defect is discovered. I certainly would prefer an abortion at 35 wks in such a case than bringing a baby to term who is likely to suffer more while dying because the brain is more developed.

The only area where there should be some debate before laws are revised is the question of life between 18- 25 weeks of gestation. That is why I am pro-religious choice (including respecting atheism or no religion) and oppose both pro-choice and pro-life groups.

Rigid positions prove only one thing ➡you do not respect Freedom of Religion or the US Constitution. If so please leave America.

I Want to Live In Paradise

December 14, 2008


Abortion – Pro Religion Viewpoint

November 16, 2008




      Freedom of Religion – The United States Constitutional Amendments – Amendment I
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,”

        I am absolutely devoted to our Constitution. As such, I cannot condone neither the Pro-Life nor the Pro-Choice organizations. I am Pro-Religion.

         I, at their birth, resuscitated and stabilized the “lightest set of triplets”, the Vincent triplets, according to the “Guiness Book of World Records” 1997 ed. Therefore, I believe I have a certain perspective that others may not.

       The Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade is now outdated. The trimester system no longer has any relationship to the potential for life, if one believes that life is defined as that which can be sustained outside the womb. We can now sustain the lives of most newborns at 24+ weeks gestational age, and a few at 22-23 weeks gestational age, although most are severely impaired.

       United We Stand. Divided We Fall. We are Americans, not Saudi Arabians, not Northern Irish, not Italian, not Iranians, not Pakistani, or any other nationalities where religion to some extent rules political decisions.

     We can all agree that abortion of a viable fetus after 21 weeks is vile unless the fetus is non-viable. Non-viable is a very complex topic and this cannot be discussed and decisions made in a paragraph.

       At one extreme is a fetus that is anencephalic (no skull or brain behind the face or above the spinal cord). I do not consider this life and have no difficulty with an abortion in this case at any time in the pregnancy. This situation is no different than brain death and I cannot understand anyone disagreeing with me here. Then there is a large grey area, where the fetus may be alive and viable for at most a few days, but cannot be saved, such as with extreme spina-bifida where the brain sticks out of an opening in the neck and the skull is empty except for fluid. Again in such a tragic case, I do not believe that abortion at  any time is not appropriate if decided by the parents in conjunction with medical personnel.  However, forcing the mother to have a C-Section would be cruel and more dangerous and the emptying of the fluid from the empty skull to facilitate the birth by shrinking the skull to make more space for the brain sticking out to pass through the cervix and not get ripped off of squashed is appropriate in this rare case. It is exactly this type of case where the lay term “partial birth abortion” was, in my opinion, inappropriately formed and used for  political purposes. The medical name for this procedure is dilation and extraction, if done prior to birth. Other types of fetal malformations which are incompatible with life are a gray area as to how best to handle them. Perhaps, this is the area where laws might be illegitimate to use to intervene and it is best left to the parents and the physician..

       In the first many weeks of a pregnancy, there is no human form, only potential life if you are pro-choice, rapidly dividing ball of cells — now known as a blastocyst at 4 weeks of age,  then this ball of cells transforms as an embryo – a rapid migration and differentiation of cells to forms parts of the body into  a fetus at 9 weeks into pregnancy – which has the basic early form of a body but not fully developed organs and  brain.  The organs and brain develop through the fetal period until birth, but are sufficient for viability barely at 21 weeks but usually at 24 weeks. Those who are pro-life believe that it is murder to abort at any time as they believe that when the sperm enters the egg this constitutes life even through the period of a blastocyst or embryo.

        Whether there is “life” before a functioning brain is formed is not a political question, but a religious question. No one can prove to you your faith. How can anyone justify laws that interfere with this religious question? I find protests or insistence of laws by both groups in this area disturbing and unconstitutional, just like I would find protests over the death bed of a brain dead person disturbing.

      We should be joining together spending our money more wisely to prevent unwanted pregnancies, to help those who cannot deal with pregnancy and choose to go to term to deal with their situation and become good and productive mothers, to help those that obtain abortion never need another one again.

       This is the common ground. This should be the starting point of all discussions. This is how I believe we should reframe the question.

For a different most interesting discussion of the abortion issue see:

%d bloggers like this: