I'm against Capital Punishment. As a Mormon I was for it and I hear Mormons around me bemoaning their government paying to keep monsters alive and kicking.

I'm also for Abortion Rights where as a Mormon I was very much against them in the Mormon way. I never understood why a kid from incest deserved to die other than the mother had a right to choose. But what about non-incest. What makes it different? The inferred rape of the situation?

So, I'm now a baby killer and murder protector.

But I have reasons for the change. In Mormonism I was guided in my biases. Without Mormonism I was force to look at the issues.

In Capital Punishment the government has a right to kill citizens. I don't think governments should have this right. People should not have societally sanctioned killing in my moral bias now. But of course I'm sanctioning the killing of fetuses. Why? Because I believe human societies are the best places to counteract the worst in human natures.

People who do the worst things in life do them within a context of the society and culture they live in. I think human cultures have a responsibility to people to be the best ones to enhance the human spirit and help counteract the worst in human nature. Human societies and cultures are the only things that can I believe. So when individual humans come from cultures that are trying the best they can to prevent the phenomenon of their violence, aggression, and heinous acts I believe it is the society's responsibility to deal with them humanely.

I don't understand how the people who have come into this world are understandably killed in this world while at the same time the unborn in this world are to be protected in their life. In retribution for their heinous crimes the killed person lived out the rest of their life in a bad situation. The unborn while they might be guaranteed life aren't guaranteed even a reason for living. Their culture and society might have no real help for them other than guaranteeing them life.

This is the illogical situation I saw and ignored in Mormonism. Why would a Mormon even be slightly motivated to improve the world or the human condition in their society and culture? Jesus is going to come with a sword anyway so endorse a god of retribution and protect the river of souls coming to add to the rivers of blood that are supposed to flow when Jesus comes.

I'm so glad I'm not caught in this Mormon madness anymore. I find it especially ironic when Mormons say the government should just shoot everyone convicted of capital crimes as quickly as possible yet at other times they go off on how bad the government is in being out to get us. Really? You want to decrease the time it takes for them to get their bullets in people?

And the protection of the innocent unborn. Do Mormons really want to baptize their children in the blood of a failed and criminally insane society and culture? One bent on moving the progress of humanity back to primitive times fighting over access to women, power, and terribly realities of aggression and the horrors of slavery, polygamy, and might being right?

Let me do the math. It takes $40K x 40 years = $1.6M to keep them in jail. It takes about that much to execute them, what with all the legal fees. So that's kind a wash and a bit off topic.

I think in Mormonism life is more an abstraction than a real thing. If you can only address issues with ideology rather than critical thought, everything needs to be an abstraction in order to be dealt with. You have to take empathy out of the picture because your church leaders have made it clear how you are supposed to feel and think about things. It's not called "The Morg" for nothing.

I find myself valuing life a lot more these days because it's a lot more obvious that it's a precious and beautiful thing. Not some nuisance standing between me and heaven.

Just a word of caution on your support of abortion "rights". In nearly all states abortions can be performed until 24 weeks and in some till 28. In our med school NICU survival at 23-24 weeks is a routine event. 28 weeks it is the norm. These are convienantly ignored facts in the debate. If you are going to reach a reasoned decision please ponder these data. I have had some 22-23 week survival although survival at that week of pregnancy is not the norm.

Cautious Words Urging Thought

Gatorman



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/29/2016 10:43PM by gatorman.

I haven't spent time in the NICU in forever (at least in medical terms).

"Survival" at 22-23 weeks happens, sure. What is the current incidence of long term, devastating neurological/pulmonary/cardiac sequela?

Last I looked (again, forever ago), blindness, mental retardation, cerebral palsy, valvular abnormalities, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, etc. were near certainties to some degree. Surfactant has changed the game, but is it a game worth winning for those kids?

Not trying to troll, just putting questions out there, that I can't answer anymore.

Correct about surfactant. Neuro protection strategies of magnesium sulfate, erythropoietin, indomethacin and gentle ventilation strategies. Retinopathy of prematurity is reduced but not eliminated by lower oxygen saturations. Banked or maternal breast milk has reduced but not eliminated NEC.

Infections remain the number one cause of death after 7 days of life. At 28 weeks the expected neuro outcome is normal in the absence of grade IV intraventricular hemorrhage. At 28 weeks most infants have no BPD due to gentle vent and non- endotracheal modes of ventilation

The neuro outcome less than 24 weeks is problematic as it is diverse. Some parents just want a baby to love. That is their value judgement. Forgot to mentioned the great benefits of the hated LDS substance of caffeine. Very helpful in neuro protection

All of this has to be considered.

Gatorman



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/30/2016 11:46AM by gatorman.

Caffeine helps in neuro protection? Could you explain that in layman's terms? Curious.

Caffeine reduces or eliminates some thing called apnea and bradycardia of prematurity. The premature infant's neuro system and respiratory drive still acts as if it is inside the uterus. Caffeine in a premature infant stimulates the respiratory drive center. It is a great assist in actually getting a preemie off mechanical ventilation. Without warning and without caffeine the premature will pause its breathing or drop its hear rate quite low or both. This reduces blood flow to the brain. Repetitive events can harm

Gatorman



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/30/2016 09:18PM by gatorman.

Agree with no capital punishment. I neither trust the press or an elected district attorney in a case that would give such finality. I believe for several consecutive years people have been released from death row outright or been given new trials due to suppressed or new evidence or presecutorual misconduct. I don't need that as a citizen. As a neonatologist abortion has always been s very bad idea especially since there are families waiting. Think of the loss of great and contributing people

Gatorman.

What happens in families where a severely impaired preemie survives? Usually divorse, other kids take a back seat and family life takes a big hit, perhaps permanently.

“Is it a game worth winning for those kids?”

Ouch.

My kid who has experienced many of the issues in gatorman’s post including a Grade IV brain bleed contributes just as much to the world as my kid at a university that has been named as the world’s best.

My kid with special needs will never be a quarterback, goalie, or catcher. Games need fans, too.

As an ex-Mormon, I still don't think it's better to kill almost human fetuses than it is to kill convicted murderers.

How about we value ALL life and don't kill either of them?

When I think of valuing life, I think of the women I know for whom abortion was or would be necessary due to extremely complex and specific circumstances. The problem with any kind of blanket policy regarding when an abortion can or can't occur is that it automatically negates the life of the woman involved. There is no arbitrary line one can draw in the sand that doesn't end up arbitrarily declaring that one life is worth more than another. Is a fetus more valuable because it would became a new life if it continued to gestate? Is a woman's or girl's life more valuable because she already has a life, family, and is an existing member of society?

My moral view, post-robotic-Mormon-non-thinking, has become that we are subjective rather than objective judges of other people's lives and value -- we can't really say what the the most moral path is for the individual(s) involved to take. It seems to me that laws that are flexible, and allow the individuals closest to the issue to determine what they feel needs to be done, are the most responsible laws to support because they acknowledge that we can't dictate morality impartially -- that you and I as individuals aren't entitled to judge the circumstances of individual women or the choice they make regarding the use of their body for the purpose of incubating a fetus.

Laws can draw a gray area line, one that factors in the state of the woman and her needs alongside the developmental stage of the fetus, to allow for case-by-case decisions to be made. As long as we make blanket laws that apply regardless of individual circumstances, we are acting as if we have the authority to control and judge other people's actions, just like the leaders of the Mormon church do.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/31/2016 12:14AM by abcdomg.

Excellent reply to the inevitable push back I get on my take on abortion. I agree with your post. The factors are so great and the solutions are so simple in people's minds.

I realize I am part of a greater society, culture, and people's actions.

Reducing the problems of capital punishment and abortion down the to the level an individual could control (shoot a perp and force a female to not abort) is in my opinion the simplistic and black and white thinking I was raised with as a maturing human being.

Can you give an example of " extremely complex and specific circumstances". I attend necessary deliveries weekly that are medically indicated due to pregnancy induced hypertension, mothers with severe uncontrolled diabetes, mothers with congenital or acquired heart disease or trauma. Gunshot wounds and motor vehicle accidents particularly. Even under " extreme circumstances" the perinatatologists can get the pregnancy to viability. The idea that abortion is entirely a woman's decision flys in the face of logic- nothing after birth is limited to one person or parent input. Government, society, laws and families have sway. Why is that null and void prior to birth?

Gatorman

gatorman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why is that null and void
> prior to birth?

Why is a woman's body aborting without her conscious involvement okay?

I regret to inform you your question is not understood. Can you educate me ?

Gatorman

Miscarriages

It isn't okay- it is horrible and to some- such as my youngest daughter- devastating. It is a loss of something special and for her the wondering who that person would have been has been painful although the years have blunted the trauma.

Medically speaking there is often chromosomal or maldevelopment of some organ involved or uterine environment is abnormal. But even then it isn't "okay".

Gatorman

I'm talking about my opinions and not your daughter's miscarriage. I've read your educated responses. I happen to disagree with your assessment. It may take a village (and I'm speaking generally) for some to raise a child but the decision to have a child is an individual's decision in my opinion. They can choose to not have the child and I don't think they are murderers. The mechanics of life don't make the bearing of human life a group decision or the woman a murderess for making the decision to abort. It started from her and letting the village into her to save a life without her consent is not right in my opinion just like letting other things into her without her consent.

My wife has never refered to my responses as educated so I am flattered. With so much emotion swirling around this topic I see no reason to continue a thread. Don't know how to anyway. As an observation- and the number one of many reasons why I like this Board- the opinions, observations, suggestions come as summaries of years of church and life events influence. Many posts have taught me new insights into both. Obviously, my posts have the same potential for all of you. Peace and blessings to you all.

Gatorman

gatorman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> My wife has never refered to my responses as
> educated so I am flattered.

Well I don't know all the medical terms and science so I may be blinded by BS but they sounded educated to me.

> With so much emotion
> swirling around this topic I see no reason to
> continue a thread. Don't know how to anyway.

It is easy. Click the "New Topic" in the Header or Foot Bar of any topic or the main topic list page. Try it out. You have a voice. Let it be heard.

> As an
> observation- and the number one of many reasons
> why I like this Board- the opinions, observations,
> suggestions come as summaries of years of church
> and life events influence. Many posts have taught
> me new insights into both. Obviously, my posts
> have the same potential for all of you.

I can agree wholehearted with your sentiments.

Medical circumstances are not the only circumstances that matter. A fetus being medically capable of being brought to term / being delivered is not the only thing that matters. Acting as if the life circumstances surrounding the woman don't matter is dismissing her value as a human being.

The reasons women have abortions vary as widely as the lives of the women themselves. If you don't listen to their voices before forming your own opinion about abortion laws, you are dismissing their value as human beings. http://shoutyourabortion.com/#

I do not disagree with either of your observations. It is disturbing to someone who spends enormous personal and state/federal/private resources in the care of newborns that at an age of viability and intact survival capability- that biological fact is NOT part of the law. Could we not agree there is a point in pregnancy where everyone's potential has to be in the discussion?

Gatorman

gatorman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Could we
> not agree there is a point in pregnancy where
> everyone's potential has to be in the discussion?

Sure we could have a discussion of it. On another thread.

Edit: I'm not agreeing. This is just an opportunity for you to start your own.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/31/2016 08:00PM by Elder Berry.

That would not be a new discussion, by any means. Those who believe that there should be a choice for a woman, generally believe that the point at which life outside the womb would be medically viable (statistically speaking) is the point at which abortion should not be an option.

Those who believe that abortion is never an option will not agree to a point in time, period.

Wrong place.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/01/2016 11:56AM by Elder Berry.

raiku Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How about we value ALL life and don't kill either
> of them?

How about we stop worshiping a god who is known to come back killing people?

It still makes no sense that Mormons would want to protect unborn children who are supposedly coming into a world destine to be baptized by fire.

Where are all the right to life cry babies when it comes to parental leave, where every industrialized country except the US has it? Babies kinda matter after they're born too. Lucky my daughter has Dad's money tree for that.

Best of all, grandbaby is NOT BIC.