facebooktwitterRSS
- Advertisement -
  • Most Commentedmost commented up
  • Most Emailedmost emailed up
  • Popularmost popular up

Sorry, no featured jobs currently.

- Advertisement -
 

« News Home

Obamacare’s birth-control rule promotes slaughter of babies



Published: Sun, December 1, 2013 @ 12:00 a.m.

Obamacare’s birth-control rule promotes slaughter of babies

The recent letter, “ruling gives businesses ploy to bypass birth-control mandate,” in Obamacare is so annoying because the writer speaks of enforcing a law that mandates the slaughter of unborn children for the selfish desires of women who have sex with someone they don’t love and then want to destroy the product of that relationship. There couldn’t be anything more selfish or evil in the world than to destroy a human being before it is born into this world.

Having served in a Christian Ministry in 42nd Street and Times Square from 1980 to 1994, I saw many women decide against having abortions after seeing the actual pictures of aborted fetuses. Three pregnant women were going to the abortion clinic and once they saw the pictures they went home and had their babies. A year later they came back and showed us their beautiful little babies — babies that would have been dumped into the garbage a year earlier.

When is America ever going to learn that God is angry with the wicked every day? Almost 2,000 years ago a virgin named Mary was pregnant with the Son of God. Her husband didn’t understand and she was frightened. She trusted God and Jesus was born to save sinners.

What if she had an abortion? These very people who now celebrate Christmas would have thrown our Lord and Savior out with the trash. May God have mercy on their souls and a nation that saves whales and allows genocide of our most fragile human lives.

Leo Feher, Youngstown

Maybe Khrushchev was right: America lacks strong discipline

Crime has gone RAMPANT in the last few years. There is now a high volume of drugs in communities across America. Every year there is more violence, and it just keeps growing. There is no doubt that at this rate every community will be traumatized with fear. We must break this culture of violence in the U.S.A.

It has been said, “Spare the rod: Spoil the child.” When parents withhold discipline, the children are “thrown out with the bath water.” The former premier of the U.S.S.R., Nikita Khrushchev, once said to the U.S. in the 1960s, “America will destroy itself!”

I surely don’t support communism, but I feel Khrushchev must have felt the U.S. lacked discipline.

At that time we had a hippie movement and an increase in illegal drug use. Starting with the parents teaching small children at home to kindergarten through the 12th grade, instruction should be given about substance abuse. Children and young adults should have information embossed in their minds that substance abuse destroys humans and leads to premature death.

We, as a nation, are headed down the wrong path. If people in the U.S. would regard drugs and crime on the same level as playing the lottery for uncertain gains, this nation would be pretty much drug free.

Paul R. Lawson, McDonald

Whipping boys in tea party brew evil, mayhem for future of the US

Deep cuts in food stamps, trying to eliminate the COLA (cost-of-living adjustment) in Social Security, wanting to destroy the Medicare system, fighting to prevent the elderly and disabled from exercising their right to vote, trying to eliminate women’s rights and pushing for another job killing so-called fair and free trade agreement in the (TPP) Transpacific Partnership are just some of the things the whipping boys in the tea party congress are trying to shove down the American people’s throats.

Some of the things they think are needed are cutting more taxes for their millionaire and billionaire campaign contributors, giving big corporations trade deals on a fast track so they can move their operations off shore to countries that pay slave wages, eliminating all collective bargaining for public employees, breaking all unions, making all states right-to-work states, lowering or eliminating the minimum wage, etc. I could go on and on but I’m only allowed so many words.

The worst part of this bunch of tea party members is the way they are trying to brainwash the American people with out and out lies and innuendo. Lies about the president, lies about women, lies about anything that is anti-tea party, and they have Rush Limbaugh spewing lies 24-7. He’s the tea party leader and the idol that they worship.

The American people are starting to wise up to these people who would like nothing better than to see big corporations running the country. Remember this when you go into that voting booth, and say to yourself “they aren’t going to take away my right to vote.”

Bud McKelvey, Hermitage, Pa.

Stand up for Stand Your Ground

Regarding the bill in the Ohio General Assembly on revising the state’s gun laws: Ohioans, there’s nothing wrong with “Stand Your Ground” laws. They stop bullying when one leaves childhood and enters adulthood.

Steve Kopa, Weirton, W. Va.

Portman overlooks key point in his Op-ed on Obamacare

The Affordable Care Act funded the retiree health care plans of more than 6,000 corporations from the time it became law until now. At that time, it was expected that companies would have been eliminating their retiree health care plans to cut costs.

Those funds ensured that people who were forced into retirement before they became eligible for Medicare had a health plan. Otherwise, those retirees would have had to buy heath care plans on the open market. The retirees who had pre-existing conditions would have been quoted unaffordable premiums or denied coverage.

The previous system offered nothing to those people. The current system gave them a four-year life line. The current system ensures that they will be able to buy coverage next year and will be able to get subsidies if they have a low income.

Sen. Rob Portman conveniently overlooked those provisions of the ACA when he wrote his commentary that was published in The Vindicator recently.

This is not the first time that one of the president’s foils has been accused of “bearing false witness” regarding the ACA.

Thomas Pirko, Kirtland

Youngstown mayor unworthy of ‘Mr. Accountability’ title

Your article revealing the years-long rent-free status of the A.P. O’Horo business and the gall of our city leadership to react as innocent bystanders is appalling but not surprising.

We re-elected this government saprophyte to yet another position at the taxpayer trough. How dare Mayor Charles Sammarone be called Mr. Accountability when he has turned a blind eye to the citizens of Youngstown once again.

It would not be surprising if the big plan for Albert Street is oil and gas drilling. If Annie Gillam’s constituents are unhappy about a little concrete dust, wait until they might get the full monty from the fracking industry.

Kathleen Berry, Youngstown


Comments

176Ytown(1243 comments)posted 10 months ago

Norma McCorvey "Roe v Wade" who was at the heart of the ruling on January 22, 1973. which legalized the right to an abortion in all 50 states. Interesting to note that she later changed her mind and she is now a vocal anti-abortion activist.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/...

Suggest removal:

2Laker(21 comments)posted 10 months ago

Birth control does not cause abortions, Leo Feher. Have a nice day.

Suggest removal:

3cathylukasko(116 comments)posted 10 months ago

Mr. Pirko and Mr. McKelvy wish to encourage "dependency" on the Federal Government via redistribution of wealth. Corps. should NOT have to offer healtchare as a benefit of employment. By getting rid of this benefit and giving a better wage, individuals can choose what is best for their families. Gov't has proven that it can do NOTHING efficiently (via all the RED GOV'T programs). Healthcare is NOT a "RIGHT" and should be managed by the free market. Mr.McKelvey it is NOT the gov't's job to take care of all citizens. There should be a "safety net" for those who need it TEMPORARILY and NOT the entitlement society that was created by LBJ in his War on Poverty in the 1960's. Thanks to him, we now have a permanent class of WELFARE!

Suggest removal:

4Laker(21 comments)posted 10 months ago

Ms. Lukasko would have people with preexisting conditions be denied healthcare. Sad.

Suggest removal:

5jrolley325(800 comments)posted 10 months ago

apparently leo feher has no idea what the heck birth control is. it's not termination of a pregnancy. its used to prevent a pregnancy from happening. hey leo, while you're out crusading against birth control, why not write a letter advocating banning condom use or outlawing masturbation? whether you like it or not, people have sex. and people have sex for other reasons than procreating. but i suppose the "freedom" crowd has no problem with regulating people's sex lives.

Suggest removal:

676Ytown(1243 comments)posted 10 months ago

Laker: Ms. Lukasko did not say people with pre-existing conditions should be denied healthcare. What she said was to provide safety nets for those who need it... temporarily.

The government had a pre-x safety net in place but they have discarded. This PCIP plan was funded with $5 billion but used only 2% citing low enrollment. https://www.pcip.gov/ Now that's sad.

Suggest removal:

7Adnil(24 comments)posted 10 months ago

Evidently Ms. Lukasko believes that only the wealthy are entitled to healthcare. Why is it that "the greatest nation" is the only industrialized country that does NOT provide health care for it's citizens?

Suggest removal:

8cathylukasko(116 comments)posted 10 months ago

All the Obamacare lovers use the same "line" of those with pre-existing conditions. That is a NO BRAINER for all healthcare. They choose to IGNORE that OBAMACARE is REDISTRIBUTION of WEALTH. Healthcare is NOT a RIGHT!

EIVO, if people want healthcare, they should pay for it. Is car insurance a RIGHT that Americans should have?

Laker is wrong and puts words in my mouth.

Adnil wants the gov't to provide for ALL AMERICANS. Gov't does NOTHING efficiently. REAL Charity comes from the individual NOT from a forced GOV'T mandate.

Suggest removal:

9cathylukasko(116 comments)posted 10 months ago

Handouts and the "low information voters" have been the reason we have Obama for a 2nd term . . .

Patriot Americans will work to IMPEACH him for BENGHAZI, FAST & FURIOUS, IRS SCANDAL, AP SCANDAL, and the list goes on and on . . .

What a sad commentary on the 1st black President

Suggest removal:

10Elusiveman(4 comments)posted 10 months ago

TeaPublican way of thinking. Love the Fetus, Kill the Child.

Suggest removal:

11birdseed(66 comments)posted 9 months, 4 weeks ago

white Christian males who smoke and/or own guns are racists. this according to liberals. where is john wayne, clark gable and frank Sinatra now that we need them.

Suggest removal:

12pulaskifarm(26 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

In vitriol fertilization WILL BE the method of conception.
In vitriol fertilization will shape this debate within a decade.
Human control of the zygotes genetics is beneficial.
Humans will reap life long benefit from this service.
We the People & Insurance companies will demand it.
An example:
Natal intensive care can costs millions of dollars a week.
This money will be saved and used to provide the service.

'Any change, even a change for the better, is always accompanied by drawbacks and discomforts.'

Arnold Bennett

Suggest removal:

13doubled(210 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

eivo and lukasko, let me first ask you something...at what point did you conclude that using or practicing birth control is the same as abortion? I mean honestly, is there something wrong with your brains?? I think it's a legitimate question, that requires a response, considering the leap of logic you made in the first instance.

Suggest removal:

14Ytown76(32 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

If you follow the low information put out by the media you would conclude that contraception includes only certain things "preventative". They do not mention ACA coverage for IUDs, and drugs like Plan B and Ella that kill the embryo by blocking its ability to implant in the uterus essentially starving the embryo to death. The FDA specifically advises that ella should not be taken if there is a “known or suspected” pregnancy. Scientific studies show that ella not only prevents implantation, but can harm an “established” pregnancy. The FDA’s prescribing instructions for ella cite animal studies demonstrating high embryo-fetal loss.

Suggest removal:

15dontbeafool(912 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

First of all, car insurance isn't a right eivo, it is mandatory! Good comparison. That would be great if employers didn't offer any Heath insurance plans or contributions. Pay check= 1k, my health insurance premium= 1k. If I could even get health care, because it isn't a right. With the exception of the wealthiest people, the streets would look like a disease ridden 3rd world country. You people would be the first ones on the phones to your congressman if you were stricken with a disease and couldn't pay for health insurance. "I PAY TAXES" you would yell, and you would demand assisistance. Extreme right, hypocritical loonies. If only Hitler's parents practiced birth control......

Suggest removal:

16birdseed(66 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

survival of the fittest and it aint gonna change.

Suggest removal:

17dontbeafool(912 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

@ Eivo, I apologize about the car insurance, that was a comment that Cathy made with your name by it. I can apologize when mistaken. The employer's not offering insurance wasn't directed towards you, but at the comment that Cathy made, you just assumed I was talking about you. I happen to be a very productive and dependable employee who has worked at the same place for the last 21 years, with outstanding evaluations for probably 17 out of those 21. And then the military prior to that. So at least I'm not a freeloader. Yet to hear what you do for a living.

Suggest removal:

18L0L(661 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

@Leo Feher you are a complete nut. Your thought process is dimented. How is using contraception (which PREVENTS pregnancy) slaughtering unborn babies?? If they were never concieved then what are you slaughtering????

And not to start a war but how can you pro-lifers argue to take someone's choice away from what they want to do with their body? Equal rights, right to vote, right to this, right to that..... who gives you the right to pick and choice which rights people should have? Last I checked we live in the land of the free.

I'll go a step further. Regarding all of these leaches who use kids to receive a paycheck and live off of the system they should either be fixed or kicked off of assistance if they have another child while receiving assistance. If you're receiving assistance you obviously can't take care of your family financially so while receiving assistance you should not be allowed to have any more children or you lose assistance. I'm tired of paying for these P.O.S. to sit on their a$$ at home and pop out kids!

Suggest removal:

19dontbeafool(912 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

@LOL, they want to save babies only so they can have more people to gripe about having to pay for later in life.

Suggest removal:

2076Ytown(1243 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

A man died and went to heaven.

While there, he had a chance to speak directly to God. He said "With all the suffering on earth, the illness, the poverty, the crimes, why didn't you send someone to help us?

God answered "I did. You aborted them".

Suggest removal:

21dontbeafool(912 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

So warm and fuzzy. One of the bad things about religion is that you can make up a whole conversation between God and a fictional man and pass it off as religion.. I don't believe that is scripture, so you are basically putting words into God's mouth. I am not pro abortion, I a pro BIRTH CONTROL. Although a conservative Republican stated once, that it is not a legitimate rape if the woman conceives I believe that abortion is acceptable in extreme cases of rape and incest only..

Suggest removal:

22dontbeafool(912 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

I didn't say anything about birth control after conception. It is funny how someone who is so PRO LIFE could be such a jack arse to others. You make me doubt all that is good in this world. I know you don't work, so go get a good, meaningful hobby and do something productive. It can't be related to dealing with people though.

Suggest removal:

2376Ytown(1243 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

Dontbeafool: I didn't quote the bible. It was a joke. You know...a funny! You are sometimes way too serious!

Suggest removal:

24dontbeafool(912 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

you ask anyone on here if you think that post was a joke, or you trying to preach and see what answer you get. I haven't heard many funny jokes about abortion. It is funny you say that I am too serious, because I am known as a laid back, easy going jokester by friends and co-workers. People just irk me with their stupidity on here. Not you 76, but others. Although we have different beliefs on a lot of things, you do seem intelligent. Others just get under my skin because of their hate propoganda. I probably shouldn't even read any of this crap because it just brings me down.

Suggest removal:

25Jerryl(105 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

Not a funny joke.
You could just as easily have suggested that the savior was prevented from being conceived (a reference to birth control).
That would be offensive to the Green family (Hobby Lobby) who supports birth control.

Suggest removal:

2676Ytown(1243 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

I actually posted that to provoke thought.

True, my joke is not funny when you seriously think about the 1.2 million fetuses aborted each year because of inconvenience in the name of women's right to choose. Over 55 million since Roe v Wade. From 2001 to 2010, the # of abortions fell by 9 % and the # of teen abortions dropped about 30 %. Is it possible that people are becoming more informed? Interesting that Norma McCorvey, the woman behind Roe v Wade is now pro life.

It's an oxymoron that abortion is considered women's health. Talk about a war on women!

Here's another thought to ponder. What if vasectomies for men became the common practice of birth control and reversed when couples want to conceive?

Suggest removal:

27L0L(661 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

@76 you quote how many abortions there have been due to the woman's right to choose but that was their choice to make. How do you believe that you should be able to make that choice for any woman whether or not she has the baby? Are you going to pay to raise the baby? Which brings me to my next point.......

Regarding vasectomies for men until they are ready to concieve would be a GREAT idea!! Im serious. Think of how many babies mamas that would save us from having to support while they pop out kids as a way of living. I would take it a step further and say the vasectomies cant be reversed until they are married and have to pass a test!! You have to pass a test to drive a car in this country why not to have a kid?!

Suggest removal:

28drpautot(70 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

Lets stop and think about the drugs in general for a second, and the affordable care act overall. The root of the law is to make health care affordable, with doctors being able to do testing and preventative maintenance being foremost, since the problems in the health care system are chronic illnesses, and the prevention on heart disease, stroke, and cancer being the primary bloodsuckers of the financial burdens families face. The birth control drugs arent being dispensed as just a cure all for permiscuious sex, but as a preventative drug against ovarian cancer, just as smoking cessation is now covered by Medicaid for those who wish to quit smoking for the health of themselves as well as their families. The overall goal of the Affordable care act is to lower the total cost of health care in the United States. When are we going to see that the politicians who are being kept in office by the lobbyists who work for the drug companies are feeding into the puritanical upbringings of the Christian right wingers, to vilify a drug that has been overwhelmingly shown to reduce the risk of the very disease that kills young woman, mothers, grandmothers...the very loved ones we would do anything to help make sure they never had cancer in the first place? Its Not about an abortion, when its about your life is it? Is it selfish to want a wife to be there for her children and not taken away too soon by cancer when we have the ability to stop it?

Suggest removal:

29L0L(661 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

@eivo. Im sorry but if my wife were raped she would not be having that kid. And no im not making that decision for her I know thats what decision she would make and I would support it 100 %.

Suggest removal:

30L0L(661 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

But murder is murder. You can't have it both ways. If you can make an exception then that's pro CHOICE

Suggest removal:

31L0L(661 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

@eivo, then how can u be pro-life yet make an exception for rape and the death penalty? Sounds like you're more pro-choice than you think.

Suggest removal:

32L0L(661 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

Eivo- "There is no such thing as pro-choice. You are either pro-life or pro-death. I am pro-life."

An exception for rape and capital punishment would contradict your statement.

Suggest removal:

33L0L(661 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

If you allow an exception to abortion in the case of rape then thats pro-choice. Pro-life people are pro-life period.

Suggest removal:

3476Ytown(1243 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

drpaultot: "The birth control drugs arent being dispensed as just a cure all for permiscuious sex, but as a preventative drug against ovarian cancer,"

No dr, (questionable), the pill is NOT, correction NEVER prescribed as a preventative drug against ovarian cancer,. However it may, just as breastfeeding or having given birth, lower your chances of getting ovarian cancer.

Where does the IUD, Plan B and Ella fit into this "cancer prevention" as you say.

Suggest removal:

35Sane1(24 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

Shorter version of eivo:

"I'm pro-life except when I'm pro-death"

Suggest removal:

36drpautot(70 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

Ytown76, I was stating the benefits of the drugs. doctors prescribe drugs that are primarily used for one disease or disorder for a completely different one all the time. Lithium is an anti seizure medication, but is given to Bi polar patients all the time, Clonidine is for blood pressure, but is often taken with others for ADHD. IUD, Plan B, and Ella rent covered, but ask your doctor to be sure. Here is more information about benefits of birth control, as well as the risks.

http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/cance...

Suggest removal:

37KSUgrad(144 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

It's called off-label.

“Many people may be surprised to know that the FDA regulates drug approval, not drug prescribing, and doctors are free to prescribe a drug for any reason they think is medically appropriate,” says G. Caleb Alexander, MD, MS, a medical ethics advocate and assistant professor of medicine at the University of Chicago Medical Center. "Off-label use is so common, that virtually every drug is used off-label in some circumstances."

76Ytown is incorrect to say that 'the pill is NEVER prescribed as an ovarian cancer preventative. She is just being naive.

Suggest removal:

38Sane1(24 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

eivo,

You are such a waste of digital bandwidth.

reminder: Your post 49 " I have already admitted that I am pro-death in the case..."

So, to say that you are pro-life except when you are pro-death is accurate.

Own it!

Suggest removal:

3976Ytown(1243 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

KSUGrad: There is no known way to prevent ovarian cancer. The pill is never prescribed as a cancer prevention.

Although birth control pills may reduce the risk of ovarian cancer but is also linked to higher cervical, breast and liver cancer rates.

Suggesting off-label use won't fly because the doctor may prescribe birth control pills for a primary use such as the obvious or for irregular periods, PCOS or even acne but not as a cancer prevention.

We only wish we had a vaccine or preventive medicine for cancer.

Suggest removal:

40PaulineC1(1 comment)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

"oxymoron that abortion is considered women's health"

This is the story of my abortion.

I was 28 years old and my husband and I were anxiously, excitedly, awaiting the arrival of our second child. I was very happy with my OB-GYN and was going to all my prenatal care visits. During my seventh month the nurses and doctor said they were "having difficulty" hearing fetal heartbeat and that the baby wasn't "as active" as they would like, but don't worry and come back next week for a recheck. I was scared, and prayed a lot, but wasn't discouraged. The next week they told me that my baby was dead. I felt like my heart was ripped out of my chest. Doctor told me that my body would naturally abort the fetus, "in God's time". I'll never forget that phrase. Two weeks later I still appeared to be pregnant, but just could not bear being in public, for all the world to see, our child never to be born. Three weeks later the doctors confirmed that the fetal tissues and skeleton was collapsing, Still we were waiting for "God's Time". After five weeks I pleaded with my doctor to take this decaying mass from my body. He explained that it would be a violation of his Catholic faith to do so, just continue praying. As I was also Catholic, I understood why he held that position against abortion, yet it didn't seem justified. I would continue to pray.

After almost seven and a half weeks I went into septic shock (blood poisoning) and almost died. The reason for the septic shock was obvious to the ER physicians, I was carrying a decaying mass in my uterus, waiting for "God's Time". I had blood transfusions, and consented to an abortion.

Needless to say I was a heartbroken, physical and emotional wreck. I needed to and tried to talk with my pastor, he refused to speak with me because I'd consented to an abortion, the circumstances (I was told by his secretary) made no difference.
To this day, I still feel pangs of guilt when I hear the abortion discussions. While I could rationalize that I had an abortion to save my life, I also know that I should have had an abortion as soon as fetal death had been confirmed. "God's time" brought me to the brink of death.

Years later, I reflect on the lesson I have learned and wish that other could comprehend it. There are many reasons why a woman may elect to abort, some not so obvious to the public. Those reasons maybe selfish and self serving, and there are yet other reasons that are none of my business. I can not and should not judge another's motives. I leave that to God.

My doctor's blind adherence to his religious beliefs almost cost me my life. Advocates who declare that abortion is not an element of women's health are promoting the same-misguided and uninformed notion.

Every time I'm exposed to the abortion controversy I'm reminded of the child I lost and how close I came to my own death, I can't begin to tell you how painful it is to rip open that wound.

Suggest removal:

41dontbeafool(912 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

@Pauline, not much you can say about your story except for wow and thanks for sharing. Often there is a blurred line between one's religious beliefs and common sense. The God I believe in forgives. When a religious leader shuns another person, it is a immediate red flag. I wish you well and hope you cling to your beliefs and not let the actions of morons sway you.

Suggest removal:

4276Ytown(1243 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

Pauline: My sympathies to you and your family for your loss after carrying a child for 7 months.

I am shocked by what you had to endure as a result of a grossly uncaring doctor whose actions border on malpractice. What a monster.

I do not understand how the word abortion was used if your child died in utero of natural causes or unknown causes. An abortion refers to an operation or other intervention to purposely end a pregnancy.

A spontaneous abortion (medical term) where the fetus did not survive before it is viable (before 20 weeks) is also called a miscarriage. Although a miscarriage is the loss of pregnancy before 20 weeks. If a fetus dies due to natural causes after 20 weeks, is considered stillborn. If you did not go into labor, or continued to have complications, a D&C would have been necessary. A baby at 7 months cannot be absorbed into the system.

When a miscarriage happens before 20 weeks, and you have not passed all of the tissue (incomplete abortion) a suction dilation and curettage (D&C) of the uterus may be needed to remove any retained products of the pregnancy.

Although I cannot even begin to know your grief, I do understand the heartbreak of miscarriage. At 5 weeks gestation, the twin of my son was miscarried. I went on to deliver a healthy baby boy but we always wonder why the other did not survive but hope to meet this precious soul in heaven. Before early pregnancy tests, many women did not even know that they were pregnant when they miscarried. In your case, you carried to nearly full term and had time to bond and anticipate the birth. Please understand that you did nothing wrong. You did not end the pregnancy but for reasons unknown, the baby did not survive. Shame on the people you came into contact with who did not have the decency or compassion to comfort you in your time of need. Peace be with you.

Suggest removal:

43Cosmo19(53 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

Pauline,

My heart and prayers go out to you. I have a cousin who had similar circumstances which resulted in a hysterectomy. I can not know, but understand your pain.

In spite of all those here on earth that will judge and remonstrate and second guess your actions, know that God will understand all the circumstances and give you justice and peace.

May God lift you in his hands.

Suggest removal:

44Cosmo19(53 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

76Ytown,

I was appalled at your response to Pauline.

On one hand you expressed sympathy, but then you proceeded to lecture her on definitions. Couldn't you just have been compassionate?

I took the thrust of Pauline's letter was that she was victimized by a doctor who was in his ideological box. She was rejected by her priest who was in his anti-abortion box, and now feels stigmatized by others who say that women's health and abortion are"oxymoronic".

I don't know anything about your qualifications to provide medical definitions, but please know that the CDC says"In the United States, there is no standard definition of the term 'stillbirth'. ( Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. State Definitions and Reporting Requirements (PDF) (1997 Revision ed.). National Center for Health Statistics

Suggest removal:

45Jerryl(105 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

eivo, the real issue of Pauline's letter is if it is right for a doctor to withhold treatment to a patient based on the doctor's religious convictions.

Reread what she wrote. " I pleaded with my doctor to take this decaying mass from my body. He explained that it would be a violation of his Catholic faith to do so, just continue praying."

This doctor had power over his patient, and he used that power to exercise HIS religious beliefs.

Similarily, an employer has power over his employee, should the employer be able to exercise HIS religious beliefs over his employees?

Suggest removal:

46Jerryl(105 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

Eivo,

That might be what your issue is, but the message of Pauline's letter is clear. Her doctor refused reasonable treatment because of HIS ideology. He exercised power over her pleadings!

I don't know where you are coming from, but most employees want to keep there jobs.

Suggest removal:

47dontbeafool(912 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

@parlay, EIVO is the nutcase who hangs up those signs. Now you know.

Suggest removal:

4876Ytown(1243 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

Cosmo: You misunderstood my response to Pauline. There is no lecture only an explanation of the difference in terms . What I read was that she lost her baby at 7 months gestation. The doctor refused treatment. I said I do not understand how the word abortion was used if your child died in utero of natural causes or unknown causes to which I went on to explain the differences.

I didn't read any reference to her ending the pregnancy although according to Pauline "There are many reasons why a woman may elect to abort, some not so obvious to the public". Sadly, Pauline has lived with the misconception that a D&C would constitute an abortion.

~ A stilllbirth is defined by the CDS as follows: Fetal death refers to the spontaneous intrauterine death of a fetus at any time during pregnancy. Fetal deaths later in pregnancy (at 20 weeks of gestation or more, or 28 weeks or more, for example) are also sometimes referred to as stillbirths
.http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fetal_death.htm

Suggest removal:

49dontbeafool(912 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

@76 if you are under employed, just quit and go get another job, people do it all the time. That is what you and eivo recommended people do if their employer's religious beliefs are pushed on them.
@eivo, just was at service this morning. Jesus is the reason for the season.

Suggest removal:

5076Ytown(1243 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

dontbeafool: I wonder if you will be as critical when people start using their health plan through the exchange only to find out that their prescription is not on the formulary list of approved drugs

Merry Christmas!

Suggest removal:

51dontbeafool(912 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

I didn't mention anything about prescription drugs. You changed that topic really fast. People get defensive when they are asked to follow their own advice.

Suggest removal:

52dontbeafool(912 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

Oh... Merry Christmas.

Suggest removal:

53Elf2(75 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

76...
Abortions have been called D&Cs for years at facilities that don't want to admit that abortions are done there.

It's just semantics.

Suggest removal:

5476Ytown(1243 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

ELF2, Yes, the procedure, dilation and curettage, involves scraping of the lining of the uterus and can be done for various diagnostic and therapeutic reasons. However, an abortion, purposely ends a pregnancy by way of an abortion pill, D & C, extraction method or partial birth abortion. Our poster did not have a viable fetus and needed to be treated for what was a life threatening condition. People die from sepsis (blood infections).

Suggest removal:

5576Ytown(1243 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

dontbeafool: "I didn't mention anything about prescription drugs. You changed that topic really fast."

Unless you've been under a rock for the past 2 weeks, this entire thread has been about “ruling gives businesses ploy to bypass birth-control mandate,” The birth control in question is available only by prescription.

Suggest removal:

56birdseed(66 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

one day the feminists will get their due along side Adolph hitler. joseph stalin and pol pot. this is where they belong.

Suggest removal:

57birdseed(66 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

this constitutional republic was formed in order to provide opportunity and personal freedoms not welfare. if you believe otherwise you will be welcomed to the scrap heap of political experiments. there you will meet marx, engels, lenin, stalin and hitler. it is where you belong.

Suggest removal:

58SheDevil(120 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

@76Ytown,

opps.... looks like you are in the wrong thread yourself.

This thread is "Obamacares-birth -control-rule-promotes-slaughter"

Suggest removal:

59dontbeafool(912 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

@76, your response was on topic to this thread, but not to my statement towards you. Eivo's and your stances and comments suggest that if you don't like your employers medical coverage because their religious beliefs, just go get another job. In your comment, I believe in another thread, you stated you had a long 11 months of being out of work, you found a job, but you are under employed. I simply suggested you follow your own recommendations by just quitting and go get another job, it is easy and people do it all of the time. It makes my point that it is hard to find a job with med benefits, so now add in trying to find a job with medical benefits that meets your needs and matches your new employer's religious beliefs. It sounds easy, but it is not. I hope you weren't collecting any type of unemployment or anything, because I wouldn't want you to fall into Eivo's freeloader category.

Suggest removal:

6076Ytown(1243 comments)posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago

My bad? The letter is in rebuttal to “ruling gives businesses ploy to bypass birth-control mandate,”. (2nd sentence in above letter).

Suggest removal:

61dontbeafool(912 comments)posted 9 months, 2 weeks ago

Regardless what thread, you said it. It all relates to health care coverage. It is just the fact when you get called out on your double talk, you don't want to talk about it. But to your credit, at least when you get backed into a corner, you avoid it in a much more subtle way than your co partner eivo.

Suggest removal:

6276Ytown(1243 comments)posted 9 months, 2 weeks ago

dontbeafool: my quote: " You are free to work somewhere else if you don't like the benefits they provide. If you don't get 3 weeks vacation in your first year of employment, accept another job with that benefit. If you don't like working nights or weekends, accept a day job."

I'll add to to that. If you don't like it but you have to work there since there is no other option, you can follow Nancy Pelosi's suggestion to "Embrace the suck".

BTW, in case you didn't know, Unemployment Insurance FUTA tax, is paid for by the employer and is taxable as income. In times of high unemployment, the benefits are expanded.

Suggest removal:

63dontbeafool(912 comments)posted 9 months, 2 weeks ago

So just quitting and finding another job with benefits isn't that easy now, is it. I think you just fell into Eivo's freeloader category. There are hundreds of jobs in Vindy jobs listed every day, just ask eivo.

Suggest removal:

64dontbeafool(912 comments)posted 9 months, 2 weeks ago

Why didn't you get on 76 for sitting at home collecting unemployment for a year when she could have been working then? Hmmm. She doesn't meet your criteria?

Suggest removal:

65dontbeafool(912 comments)posted 9 months, 2 weeks ago

Why were you in an outrage about them extending unemployment benefits then? What's it to you? I see you make exceptions when it is a fellow right winger.

Suggest removal:

66dontbeafool(912 comments)posted 9 months, 2 weeks ago

What does one have to do with another? Oh yeah, nothing.

Suggest removal:

67dontbeafool(912 comments)posted 9 months, 2 weeks ago

You are too funny! When I mention SNAP, I get from you, "is there a free hand out that you are not in favor of?" If you are for it, it's okay. You take that hostage taker approach too I see. If you are in favor of something, and you think it is a good program, then why not just be for it? Instead, you would rather take it hostage unless your demands (repeal Obamacare) are met. Wonder where you got that philosophy from? Maybe from the Tea Baggers!

Suggest removal:

6876Ytown(1243 comments)posted 9 months, 2 weeks ago

I'm self employed.

Suggest removal:

69southsidedave(4780 comments)posted 9 months, 2 weeks ago

I counted 3 main people who have nothing better to do than post to this discussion multiple times...insanity rules

Suggest removal:

7076Ytown(1243 comments)posted 9 months, 2 weeks ago

Let's not call it murder because you know, sometimes people are just not mature or responsible enough to be ready for a child even though they're mature or responsible for sex, and murder sounds so harsh...choice is much nicer.

And let's just call an IUD and the morning after pill "birth control" even though they terminate the fertilized embryo.

Suggest removal:

71GailsMom(16 comments)posted 9 months, 2 weeks ago

Recent "studies have not established that emergency contraceptive pills prevent fertilized eggs from implanting in the womb, leading scientists say. Rather, the pills delay ovulation, the release of eggs from ovaries that occurs before eggs are fertilized, and some pills also thicken cervical mucus so sperm have trouble swimming."
"Leading scientists say studies ... provide strong evidence that Plan B does not prevent implantation, and no proof that a newer type of pill, Ella, does"
-http://www.catholicworldreport.com-

Suggest removal:

72dontbeafool(912 comments)posted 9 months, 2 weeks ago

Come out of your bomb shelter Eivo. Someone is always under an attack with you. It is a war on babies, it's a war on men, it's a war on women. Second thought, stay in your bomb shelter..... Until there is a war on grumpy, old, unemployed, hypocrites, you are SAFE.

Suggest removal:

73DACOUNTRYBOY(229 comments)posted 9 months, 2 weeks ago

So if someone is killing you it isn't a war? Killing babies on a large scale has all of the trademarks of genocide.

"Genocide is "the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group",

Suggest removal:

7476Ytown(1243 comments)posted 9 months, 2 weeks ago

GailsMom: Here's the link to your article: http://www.catholicworldreport.com/Bl...

If you continue to read the article it says:

Ms. Belluck failed to mention is that 90 percent of those pregnancies “miscarried” and the other 10 percent were “lost to follow-up”. So what the studies supporting the FDA approval of Ella actually show is that even the dose of Ella used as “emergency contraception” is high enough to interfere with the early development of the embryo in such a fashion as to increase the miscarriage rate if a pregnancy is recognized.

Suggest removal:

75Elf2(75 comments)posted 9 months, 1 week ago

@76Ytown,
You just demonstrated an important consideration in this discussion, specifically that some folks rely on scientists, others rely on bloggers.

Suggest removal:

76Elf2(75 comments)posted 9 months, 1 week ago

Probably doesn't make sense to you, but reliance on bloggers is for the feeble minded.

Suggest removal:

7776Ytown(1243 comments)posted 9 months, 1 week ago

If predicting ovulation were so simple, the rhythm method would be all that we need to prevent pregnancy.

Medicine and science can't agree whether the morning after pill delays ovulation, or changes the environment to prevent the fertilized egg from implanting into the uterus. If you trust science for their theory, in order for Plan B to be effective you have to have not yet ovulated.

Menstrual Cycle 101:

Ovulation can vary from between Day 11 and Day 21 of a woman's cycle. Hence the reason the rhythm method fails.

Days 15-22 After releasing the egg (ovulation), the follicle produces progesterone, which thickens the lining of the uterus for implantation. The egg is fertilized in the outer part of the fallopian tube, generally within 12 hours of ovulation. After it is fertilized, the egg slowly travels down the fallopian tube.

Days 23 to 24: Between 6 and 8 days after ovulation implantation of a fertilized egg can take place. When the fertilized egg attaches itself to the uterine wall and begins to produce hCG it is called implantation and can be detected by a pregnancy test.

Labels inside every box of morning-after pills, drugs widely used to prevent pregnancy after sex, say they may work by blocking fertilized eggs from implanting in a woman’s uterus. Respected medical authorities, including the National Institutes of Health and the Mayo Clinic, have said the same thing on their Web sites.

Suggest removal:

78dontbeafool(912 comments)posted 9 months, 1 week ago

translator please

Suggest removal:

79SheDevil(120 comments)posted 9 months, 1 week ago

@76,
The respected medical authorities you cited actually say some thing different:

From Mayo Clinic: "Morning-after pills do not end a pregnancy that has implanted. Depending on where you are in your menstrual cycle, morning-after pills may act by one or more of the following actions: delaying or preventing ovulation, blocking fertilization, or keeping a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus. However, recent evidence strongly suggests that Plan B One-Step and Next Choice do not inhibit implantation. It's not clear if the same is true for Ella".-http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/morning-after-pill/MY01190/DSECTION=why%2Dits%2Ddone

From National Institutes of Health: "Emergency contraception (Plan B or Next Choice) most likely works by preventing or delaying the release of an egg from a woman's ovaries. This method prevents pregnancy in the same way as regular birth control pills. " -http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/007014.htm

Providing a source that contradicts your argument suggests that maybe you haven't done the research you claim

Suggest removal:

80dontbeafool(912 comments)posted 9 months, 1 week ago

good research Shedevil..... but are you relying on scientist who support the position that you already had? Because then that info, according to Eivo, will be biased.

Suggest removal:

8176Ytown(1243 comments)posted 9 months, 1 week ago

SheDevil: Carefully read what you just posted...

1. Morning-after pills do not end a pregnancy that has implanted.
2. Depending on where you are in your menstrual cycle, morning-after pills may act by one or more of the following actions:
...delaying or preventing ovulation
...blocking fertilization
......keeping a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus
...However, recent evidence strongly suggests that Plan B One-Step and Next Choice do not inhibit implantation. It's not clear if the same is true for Ella.

With that information, we know that if we take the morning after pill before ovulation, it can delay the egg from being released. Of course, relying on whether ovulation has already occurred is the age-old rhythm method.

Or, it can prevent the fertilized egg from being implanted into the uterus which prevents the pregnancy from progressing and terminating the pregnancy.

The FDA specifically advises that ella should not be taken if there is a “known or suspected” pregnancy. Scientific studies show that ella not only prevents implantation, but can harm an “established” pregnancy. The FDA’s prescribing instructions for ella cite animal studies demonstrating high embryo-fetal loss.

So in a sugar coated world, Plan B, the morning after pill works if you have not ovulated because it delays ovulation, but if you have already ovulated it won't work. It's not clear if the same works with Ella but it does suggest that Ella keeps a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus.

Suggest removal:

82dontbeafool(912 comments)posted 9 months, 1 week ago

The morning-after pill (brand name Plan B) and the week-after pill, which actually only works for five days after unprotected sex, is called ella.
Both are classified by the Food and Drug Administration as contraceptives. Neither is the same as the abortion drug RU486, or Mifeprex. That pill isn't considered a contraceptive and isn't covered by the new insurance requirements.
The constant references to Plan B and ella as abortion-causing pills frustrates Susan Wood, a professor of health policy at George Washington University and a former assistant commissioner for women's health at the FDA.
"It is not only factually incorrect, it is downright misleading. These products are not abortifacients," she says. "And their only connection to abortion is that they can prevent the need for one."

Suggest removal:

8376Ytown(1243 comments)posted 9 months, 1 week ago

Emergency contraceptive pills will have no effect on an established, implanted pregnancy. There is one exception, which is ulipristal (ella®), a prescription-only emergency contraception. Although the available data is vague, it is likely that ulipristal might be able to disrupt an established pregnancy, based on the way it works and on its similarities to mifepristone (also known as RU-486 or "the abortion pill") by blocking progesterone, a hormone necessary to build and maintain the uterine wall,

http://www.emedtv.com/understanding-e...

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/o...

Suggest removal:

84dontbeafool(912 comments)posted 9 months, 1 week ago

idk, Susan Wood, a Professor at George Washington University and part of the FDA seems to be a pretty reliable source to me.

Suggest removal:

8576Ytown(1243 comments)posted 9 months, 1 week ago

Very interesting... here's her connection to Planned Parenthood.

Read page 4 "Introduction and Background" and
See Table 1 (page 5 of the document)

http://cms.montgomerycollege.edu/uplo...

Suggest removal:

8676Ytown(1243 comments)posted 9 months, 1 week ago

Ha! It gets even better!

Guess who are the Preserving Core Values in Science Award Winners for 2005 and 2012? None other than Susan Wood and Georgetown Law Center student Sandra Fluke who testified before Congress on behalf of Nancy Pelosi that "Forty percent of the female students at Georgetown Law reported to us that they struggled financially as a result of this policy,” Fluke said, referring to the fact that the university doesn’t pay for contraception. “Without insurance coverage, contraception, as you know, can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school.”

http://www.arhp.org/professional-educ...

Suggest removal:

87SheDevil(120 comments)posted 9 months, 1 week ago

76ytown, This is what YOU said ":Labels inside every box of morning-after pills, drugs widely used to prevent pregnancy after sex, say they may work by blocking fertilized eggs from implanting in a woman’s uterus. Respected medical authorities, including the National Institutes of Health and the Mayo Clinic, have said the same thing on their Web sites"

This is what the Mayo clinic website says:"However, recent evidence strongly suggests that Plan B One-Step and Next Choice do not inhibit implantation."

Clearly contradicts your claim that Morning after "work by blocking fertilized eggs from implanting"

YOUR cited source does NOT support your argument!

Suggest removal:

8876Ytown(1243 comments)posted 9 months, 1 week ago

SheDevil: You left off the last sentence:
"It's not clear if the same is true for Ella".
http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/morn...

Here's the Ella label from Watson Pharma, Inc

http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsat...

Suggest removal:

89SheDevil(120 comments)posted 9 months, 1 week ago

YOU are making GLOBAL statements about morning after pills

Your source, makes the distinction that of the many "morning after pills" one may interfere with implantation. They are even more careful by saying that the research is not clear that implantation is inhibited.

Your problem is that you are trying to paint all EC with a broad brush.

If you want to make the argument that the prescription only Ella, may interfer with implantation, go ahead.

Expansion of that position to all morning pills is either ignorant or dishonest.

Suggest removal:

9076Ytown(1243 comments)posted 9 months, 1 week ago

The broader brush is that all of these fall under the contraceptive benefit of the ACA.

Suggest removal:

91SheDevil(120 comments)posted 9 months, 1 week ago

And you have chosen to broadly characterize one particular contraceptive ("morning after pill"), dishonestly.

Just as the author of the original letter has broadly characterized birth-control as baby slaughter. Rational people know that is not true. Granted that some birth control measures will result in fetal or embryonic death, but most do not.

Similarily, I would be absurd to say that gun ownership promotes killing of six year old students. Despite that some guns have been used for just that.

Suggest removal:

9276Ytown(1243 comments)posted 9 months, 1 week ago

SheDevil: I think we can agree on the following...

Contraceptives include: Emergency contraception, like Plan B® and ella®

Emergency contraception: Also called: morning after pills

Morning after pills: Do not end a pregnancy (fertilized embryo) that has implanted.

Morning-after pills may act by one or more of the following actions:
...delay or prevent ovulation
...block fertilization
...or in the case of Ella: keep a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus

Suggest removal:

93SheDevil(120 comments)posted 9 months, 1 week ago

Your respected source: "However, recent evidence strongly suggests that Plan B One-Step and Next Choice do not inhibit implantation. It's not clear if the same is true for Ella."

Simple translation: 'Currently there is no clear evidence that Ella does or does not prevent implantation.'

Suggest removal:

94dontbeafool(912 comments)posted 9 months ago

Question out of curiousity, directed to the Pro Life people. Do you believe in the death penalty?

Suggest removal:

95dontbeafool(912 comments)posted 9 months ago

Anyone else besides eivo? I don't want to try to have a discussion with him.

Suggest removal:


News
Opinion
Entertainment
Sports
Marketplace
Classifieds
Records
Discussions
Community
Help
Forms
Neighbors

HomeTerms of UsePrivacy StatementAdvertiseStaff DirectoryHelp
© 2014 Vindy.com. All rights reserved. A service of The Vindicator.
107 Vindicator Square. Youngstown, OH 44503

Phone Main: 330.747.1471 • Interactive Advertising: 330.740.2955 • Classified Advertising: 330.746.6565
Sponsored Links: Vindy Wheels | Vindy Jobs | Vindy Homes | Pittsburgh International Airport